Re: which SHELL should i do ?

[arnuld]

> On 7/12/07, Christopher Browne <cbbrowne@ca.afilias.info> wrote:

> If all you care about is scripts that you'll be using yourself, then
> zsh is a fine choice.
>
> But if you want to write shell scripts that you would consider
> contributing to the Hurd project, I think you'll find that Bash is a
> preferable choice, as we already know that Bash is included, by
> default.


ok, i will do bash then :-)


> Unfortunately, for him to change subjects like that *does* express
> some arrogance.  In effect, he's saying:
>
>   "You were asking some question; I don't care to respond to that; I
>    think it's more important to promote my agenda."

> Also unfortunately, this approach causes people to "get their backs
> up" about this.  They might well be thankful for the FSF
> contributions; they didn't get around to expressing it before he
> demanded it.  And people don't necessarily like such demands...

i did not find any arrogance when i read that. if you go to any
corporate like Prudential, Eureka Forbes, Standard Chartered Bank  (to
give some example of MNCs) and meet any managerial person there then
he will talk in manner which is worse than RMS's way. i think ROMS is
just being logical here in his reply. i have worked in corporate
environment and i assure you they talk in a way that i think is much
worse than RMS way or my way, th way i am replying, for that matters.
if this is what you call arrogance then what will you call the way of
communication of corporate bosses. by my yardstick, they are highly
selfish and  arrogant.




--
http://arnuld.blogspot.com/