openoffice-os4@samfundet.no schrieb am 22.01.05 00:11:44:
"... I am happy to write that with a few exception it seems the tcsh source is _relatively_ portable."
-thats good...
...
"Unfortunately, this still does not indicate if it would be easier to write our own intepreter or not. "
- what is easier?
...
"PS: If this is uninteresting, just tell me and I will stop posting status updates here."
- I think most of us would be happy to hear something (me included)
Daniel Weßling aka Jonny_Rico
_______________________________________________ Openoffice-os4 mailing list Openoffice-os4@samfundet.no https://lists.samfundet.no/mailman/listinfo/openoffice-os4
__________________________________________________________ Mit WEB.DE FreePhone mit hoechster Qualitaet ab 0 Ct./Min. weltweit telefonieren! http://freephone.web.de/?mc=021201
On 2005-01-21, Daniel Weßling wrote:
openoffice-os4@samfundet.no schrieb am 22.01.05 00:11:44:
<SNIP>
"Unfortunately, this still does not indicate if it would be easier to write our own intepreter or not. "
- what is easier?
Porting tcsh or writing our own c-shell script intepreter. (Not a full, interactive shell but just an intepreter for the c-shell language)
<SNIP>
-Peter aka. Archprogrammer
You cast the frotz spell on yourself. You are now emitting a bright glow! Ironically, however, you are no more enlightened than you were before.
Hi Daniel,
On 21/01/2005, you wrote:
"PS: If this is uninteresting, just tell me and I will stop posting status updates here."
- I think most of us would be happy to hear something (me included)
Agreed. While activity is quiet, it's nice to hear of some progress. Perhaps later, if things hot up, this sort of news might be better in another ML, but just now, it's good to hear.
cheers
-
"Daniel Weßling" -
Peter Bengtsson -
Tony Wyatt