From: ellis@nova.gmi.edu (Stew Ellis) Subject: Re: JOVE with working i-shell under bash environment. Date: Sun, 7 Feb 1993 17:06:45 GMT
hsuc@cory.Berkeley.EDU (Cheng Lu Hsu) writes:
>About two or three months ago, I asked about the availability
>of JOVE with working i-shell. Some mails I received told
>me that for some unknown reason JOVE's i-shell just does not
>work properly under bash. Thus, I decided to port it myself.
>Now, this new port of JOVE takes advantage of pty and works
>well under bash and rc as well (I think it shall work for tcsh too
>but I never have a chance to test it). Anyway, if someone is
>interested in it, I will upload it to sunsite.unc.edu.
>Thanks.
>Cheng-Lu (John) Hsu
>hsuc@cory.berkeley.edu
Since JOVE is a complex configurable program that I must have before I even
consider running a UNIX on any of my machines, I am interested in more
detail concerning your port. I prefer jove 4.9 running in the BSD universe
with job control, etc., because I have a number of hacks that I have not
ported to 4.14. One thing I really detest about SVR4 is that I cannot get
jove 4.9 running and that the only jove I can get running is 4.14.7, but not
in the BSD universe. What base jove release have you ported? Is it running
in the BSD or SYSV universe? While you can get interactive shells in either
universe, it is MUCH NICER to have proper job control at the same time.
I have been able to get my hacked 4.9 running on 386bsd by using the public
access machine ref.tfs.com. I have not been able to get the recover program
to work because of odd variables in the stdio structure that I have not yet
figured out. Does recover work in your port?
It would be nice if there were a public access site such as ref for people
to try out linux ports without loading it on their own machines.
If you put up your port, could you also put it up as diffs against one of
the standard releases, such as 4.14.7 at Toronto?