----- Original Message -----
From: "Dominique Orban" <Dominique.Orban@...>
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2003 11:25 PM
Subject: Re: [Mingw-users] Csh/Tcsh with MinGW
> * On Sat, 25 Oct 2003, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 24, 2003 at 01:10:25PM -0400, Dominique Orban wrote:
> > >Dear all,
> > >
> > >I wish to port a Unix project to Windows 2000/XP. The project compiles
> > >of the box with Cygwin and I thought MinGW was the right choice to
> > >native executables. The catch is that the project relies on the C-shell
> > >(either csh or tcsh) to install. Once installed, parts of it still rely
> > >csh or tcsh to run. Roughly speaking, an install script (in csh) guides
> > >user through some steps, then creates Makefiles using a simplified,
> > >home-made, version of Imake. This process is sed-and-awk-intensive.
> > >Makefiles are generated, selected C/C++ and Fortran 77 compilers create
> > >executables and libraries.
> > >
> > >I see that MinGW/MSYS contain a bash shell and was wondering whether
> > >was any plan to include a [t]csh in future releases. However, I
> > >this might not be a priority at all.
> > >
> > >Could anyone give me any info/feelings on existing tcsh which are
> > >out there? In particular:
> > >
> > >- There is a [t]csh in the AT&T project UWIN. Am I better off using
> > >Can I use this [t]csh with MinGW?
> > >- There is a tcsh in Interop Systems' Tool Warehouse
> > >http://www.interix.com/tools/warehouse.htm which actually seems similar
> > >that of ftp://ftp.blarg.net/users/amol/tcsh/ found on
> > >http://www.tcsh.org/MostRecentRelease. Can i use any of those with
> > >am I better off using Interop's Interix?
> > >- I am not interested in pay software, so that Hamilton's C-shell
> > >http://www.hamiltonlabs.com/unix-csh.htm is not an option.
> > >- I have already tried this one
> > >(this page is in french), but it seems to be missing some features and
> > >causes the installation of my project to fail miserably.
> > >
> > >[t]csh is not my favourite shell---bash is---but there simply are a
> > >number of [t]csh scripts out there and I simply lack time to convert
> > >to bash.
> > >
> > >Many thanks in advance for any info you can provide.
> > Not to push an off-topic item here but it seems like you are trying very
> > hard to avoid the use of tcsh + cygwin1.dll. Is there a reason why
> > you don't want to use this combination? If you are porting scripts
> > from UNIX, it seems like it is the best choice.
> > You don't have to install the whole cygwin distribution but you do
> > have to conform to the GPL. The same would apply to Msys, FWIW.
> Could you tell me more about this? Conforming to the GPL is just fine,
> but i thought using the Cygwin dll prevented me from building a native
> Windows executable. I presume the tcsh you are suggesting is the one
> that comes in Cygwin?
If the goal is to port scripts and porting tcsh is only necessary for that,
then why do you need a native Windows version of tcsh? Do you need to
distribute tcsh? The bash shell included with MSYS is not a "native" Windows
executable either because it depends on msys-1.0.dll (the same as