>>Sure, except this isn't a script. It's in a file named Bash_aliases >>contained in a directory named examples/startup-files. It was clearly >>intended to be copied into one's ~/.bashrc file (or to be dotted in >>from there).
>>Including it in your ~/.bashrc would effectively mask the real seq(1) >>command in all of your interactive shells. A naive user might not even >>understand that this is happening. Agreed that masking the real "seq" command would be a Very Bad Thing. The issue of what/how to name auxiliary functions is real and probably deserving of its own thread (in [email protected], not here). I have a solution that has worked well for me, but I'd be interested to hear what others have to say on the subject. > IMHO a naive user wouldn't know about examples/startup-files in the > bash source tree. In my case even a relatively sophisticated user > didn't know about it. Bad examples should be excised. I think > general /etc/[bash[_.]*|profile] and /etc/skel/ file suggestions > should be left to the distro maintainers. The problem is that code gets bandied about. Somebody sees it in that file (Bash_aliases) and copies it to his .bashrc (or whatever). Some other, less sophisticated, user happens to see it and catches it from him, etc. It becomes a virus. That's what I think many thread posters are really concerned about.
