From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: VCS comparison table Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2006 08:15:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <9e4733910610140807p633f5660q49dd2d2111c9f5fe@mail.gmail.com> <45349162.90001@op5.se> <453536AE.6060601@utoronto.ca> <200610172301.27101.jnareb@gmail.com> <45354AD0.1020107@utoronto.ca> <453DAC87.8050203@research.canon.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Lachlan Patrick , bazaar-ng@lists.canonical.com, git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Oct 24 17:15:44 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GcNzw-0001HF-Gv for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 24 Oct 2006 17:15:24 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965161AbWJXPPU (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Oct 2006 11:15:20 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965159AbWJXPPU (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Oct 2006 11:15:20 -0400 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:8383 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965161AbWJXPPT (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Oct 2006 11:15:19 -0400 Received: from shell0.pdx.osdl.net (fw.osdl.org [65.172.181.6]) by smtp.osdl.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k9OFF6aX029821 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Tue, 24 Oct 2006 08:15:07 -0700 Received: from localhost (shell0.pdx.osdl.net [10.9.0.31]) by shell0.pdx.osdl.net (8.13.1/8.11.6) with ESMTP id k9OFF5Tn003503; Tue, 24 Oct 2006 08:15:06 -0700 To: David Rientjes In-Reply-To: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.479 required=5 tests=AWL X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63-osdl_revision__1.95__ X-MIMEDefang-Filter: osdl$Revision: 1.155 $ X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.36 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, 23 Oct 2006, David Rientjes wrote: > > Some of the internal commands that have been coded in C are actually much > better handled by the shell in the first place. It's much simpler to > write and extend as well as being much more traceable for runtime > problems. Yes. However, from a portability (to Windows) standpoint, shell is just about the worst choice. Not that perl/python/etc really help - unless the _whole_ program is one perl/python thing. Windows just doesn't like pipelines etc very much. So I'd like all the _common_ programs to be built-ins.. Linus