rhubbs@watdcsu.waterloo.edu (Robert (NetJunkie) Hubbs) (01/06/88)
As it is the new year, it is time for me to make my first outrageous request. Does any one have, or know of, a program that runs under DOS that will execute unix shell scripts. I have a large number of shell scripts that I would love to run on my AT at home but I don't have a version of "SH" for it. I have been told by one person that they exist, but I have never seen or heard of one. Anyone know if they exist, or if they are even possible. Gos knows it would be useful! =============================================================================== Hey! Who took the cork off my lunch? So am I dreaming or what? Robert (NetJunkie) Hubbs ================================================================================
sreiss@teknowledge-vaxc.ARPA (Steve Reiss) (01/07/88)
We have had a bit of experience with MKS Toolkit.
It's about $150
Has korn shell, vi, and awk.
Works OK....but has some limitations.
If you want more information (such as the address of MKS) I can post it.
--steve
internet: sreiss@teknowledge-vaxc.arpa
usenet: {uunet|sun|ucbvax|decwrl|uw-beaver}!sreiss%teknowledge-vaxc.arpa
Address: Teknowledge Inc, 1850 Embarcadero Rd, POB 10119, Palo Alto, CA 94303
--
internet: sreiss@teknowledge-vaxc.arpa
usenet: {uunet|sun|ucbvax|decwrl|uw-beaver}!sreiss%teknowledge-vaxc.arpa
Address: Teknowledge Inc, 1850 Embarcadero Rd, POB 10119, Palo Alto, CA 94303donovan@cg-atla.UUCP (Dennis Donovan X5176) (01/08/88)
In article <4242@watdcsu.waterloo.edu> rhubbs@watdcsu.waterloo.edu (Robert (NetJunkie) Hubbs) writes: >As it is the new year, it is time for me to make my first outrageous request. > >Does any one have, or know of, a program that runs under DOS that will >execute unix shell scripts. I have a large number of shell scripts that >I would love to run on my AT at home but I don't have a version of "SH" >for it. I have been told by one person that they exist, but I have never >seen or heard of one. > >Anyone know if they exist, or if they are even possible. Gos knows it would >be useful! > > >=============================================================================== >Hey! Who took the cork off my lunch? > >So am I dreaming or what? > >Robert (NetJunkie) Hubbs >=============================================================================== I have bought a book called "On Command: Writing a Unix-Like Shell for MS-DOS". by Allen Holub, M&T Books, M&T Publishing. The book describes a shell that looks like a cross between sh and csh. It has things like alias and a history mechanism. It also has a script language that looks more like c-shell script than shell script. I haven't had alot of time to play around with it but it looks good. I believe that it originated in Dr. Dobbs Software Tools. I bought it for ~$40.00 and the book comes with the disk ( both executable and source code are on the disk ). A second disk with other utilities ( grep, cat, etc.) is available for ~$30.00. Dennis -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- +----------------------------------------------------------+ | Dennis L. Donovan | | UUCP : decvax!cg-atla!donovan | | AT&T : (617) 658-5600 x5716 | | USMAIL : Compugraphic Corporation | | 200 Ballardvale St., M.S. 200-2-2F | | Wilmington, MA 01887 | +----------------------------------------------------------+ "Nobody asked, just my opinion" Disclaimer: The views expressed are my own, I doubt if CG really cares anyway.
tessler@dbase.UUCP (Steven Tessler) (01/14/88)
In article <1248@cg-atla.UUCP> donovan@cg-atla.UUCP (Dennis Donovan X5176) writes: >In article <4242@watdcsu.waterloo.edu> rhubbs@watdcsu.waterloo.edu (Robert (NetJunkie) Hubbs) writes: >>Does any one have, or know of, a program that runs under DOS that will >>execute unix shell scripts. I have a large number of shell scripts that > >I have bought a book called "On Command: Writing a Unix-Like Shell for MS-DOS". >by Allen Holub, M&T Books, M&T Publishing. > >The book describes a shell that looks like a cross between sh and csh. It has >things like alias and a history mechanism. It also has a script language >that looks more like c-shell script than shell script. >Disclaimer: The views expressed are my own, I doubt if CG really cares anyway. Allen Holub's On Command (at least version 1) is not a true replacement for the Dos Command.com command interpreter. On command does emulate c-shell but it resides on top of command.com. And, it relies on command.com for loading and executing all .exe and .com programs.
driscoll@eecae.UUCP (Mike Driscoll) (01/17/88)
in article <288@dbase.UUCP>, tessler@dbase.UUCP says: > > In article <1248@cg-atla.UUCP> donovan@cg-atla.UUCP (Dennis Donovan X5176) writes: >>In article <4242@watdcsu.waterloo.edu> rhubbs@watdcsu.waterloo.edu (Robert (NetJunkie) Hubbs) writes: >>> [request for a DOS program running unix scripts] >>I have bought a book called "On Command: Writing a Unix-Like Shell for MS-DOS". >>by Allen Holub, M&T Books, M&T Publishing. >> >>The book describes a shell that looks like a cross between sh and csh. It has >>things like alias and a history mechanism. It also has a script language >>that looks more like c-shell script than shell script. >>Disclaimer: The views expressed are my own, I doubt if CG really cares anyway. > > > Allen Holub's On Command (at least version 1) is not a true > replacement for the Dos Command.com command interpreter. > > On command does emulate c-shell but it resides on top of command.com. > And, it relies on command.com for loading and executing all .exe and .com > programs. Actually, it (the On Command shell) resides on top of command.com's resident portion, which contains DOS's ONLY loader. Any program using the DOS exec call needs this loader. The transient portion of command.com is not required to be in memory, and this memory is free for use by other programs. Also, the shell's command language is not completely compatible with that of the C-shell. Finally, since a new copy of the shell is loaded to run shell scripts, and since each shell uses about 50K of memory, you may need a lot of memory to run your scripts with this shell. (Especially true if your scripts call other scripts.) Disclaimer: I have been using the On Command shell at home for about 2 weeks, and see it as a reasonable tool for those of us used to using *nix. Mike -- Michael A. Driscoll UUCP: ...ihnp4!msudoc!eecae!driscoll Dept. of Electrical Engineering ARPA: driscoll@eecae.ee.msu.edu (35.8.8.151) Michigan State University Office: (517) 353-5337 E. Lansing, MI, 48824