Alexander Skwar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So sprach [EMAIL PROTECTED] am Sun, Jun 17, 2001 at 03:51:15PM +0200:
> > Which cannot be used as 'which' is a csh script.
> > It will fail if the user has no .cshrc which sets a CSH more alias.
>
> ?
I think expecting a /bin/sh script to work well with csh is inherently
a poor idea, and I don't see that it matters what .cshrc is used, it is
not reasonable to expect it to work. I can write a program which works
correctly when fed to awk or perl, but it's a proof of concept, not a
good portable thing to do. sh and csh were and are separate things with
a small common subset.
> [askwar@teich askwar]$ file $(which which)
> > In addition: you are right, There are millions of UNIX systems without
> > 'less' installed.
>
> How many linux installation are out there? And how many UNIX installations=
> ?=20
> I *SUSPECT* linux > Unix, so your comment isn't right. Do you have numbers
> to prove me wrong?
If you are trying to be portable, as opposed to working in some
majority of cases, you admit that there are systems which lack less
which have more. I don't believe that any vendor has ever shipped a
system with less but not more, so if a portable pager is the goal then
'more' is a better choice.
The number is "many" systems which lack less, so it's not as good a
choice. I can't believe that someone used to less would be unable to
look at a file with more...
--
-bill davidsen ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
"The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the
last possible moment - but no longer" -me
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
