For me, both 10.1.5 and 10.2.2 both show this behavior (separate programs, link-count==1).
Regards,
Justin
On Thursday, December 19, 2002, at 05:33 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... egrep can be used in place of grep. On many systems, grep is just a symbolic link to egrep ...I've worked on a lot of Unix and Unix-alike systems, and can't remember grep being a symbolic link to egrep. Often, grep, egrep, and fgrep are all hard links to the same executable; the program checks argv[0] and acts accordingly.Something is wrong with the above sentence.... On 10.2.2, /usr/bin/grep seems to be a hard link to /usr/bin/grep, BTW.
Here's what I get from my 10.1.5 system:
$ ll -i /*/bin/*grep
1192004 -rwxr-xr-x 3 root admin 1582 Apr 1 2002 /sw/bin/bzegrep
1192004 -rwxr-xr-x 3 root admin 1582 Apr 1 2002 /sw/bin/bzfgrep
1192004 -rwxr-xr-x 3 root admin 1582 Apr 1 2002 /sw/bin/bzgrep
195214 -rwxr-xr-x 1 root admin 262620 Dec 6 2001 /sw/bin/egrep
195215 -rwxr-xr-x 1 root admin 262620 Dec 6 2001 /sw/bin/fgrep
195216 -rwxr-xr-x 1 root admin 262620 Dec 6 2001 /sw/bin/grep
1642371 -rwxr-xr-x 1 root admin 34116 May 13 2002 /sw/bin/pcregrep
1207186 -rwxr-xr-x 1 root admin 1332 Apr 3 2002 /sw/bin/zgrep
2350644 -rwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 105548 Aug 3 10:30 /usr/bin/egrep
2350376 -rwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 105548 Aug 3 10:30 /usr/bin/fgrep
2350675 -rwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 105548 Aug 3 10:30 /usr/bin/grep
2350925 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 14640 Aug 3 10:30 /usr/bin/nigrep
73728 -rwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 1371 Sep 2 2001 /usr/bin/zgrep
I'm surprised that /sw/bin/*grep and /usr/bin/*grep are two sets
of three copies of files; I would have expected them to look more
like /sw/bin/bz*grep (which is a very good example of a program
checking argv[0] (or $0, since this program happens to be a shell
program) and acting accordingly).
By the way, I'm not sure why "DISPLAY=:0" is preferred over "export DISPLAY=$HOSTNAME:0" (or "sentenv DISPLAY $HOSTNAME:0" in (t)csh) ...In my experience, the contents of .*shrc are highly system- and network-architecture- specific (IOW: it depends). None is "preferred," except in a specific network environment. On a single user system with local file systems and its own private X server, i.e. Mac OS X, either form should work equally well. In systems and networks with multiple heterogeneous computers, NFS mounted home directories, and separate X terminals/servers, though, all bets are off. Your local sys admin is your friend.... I still don't really understand how X works ever after trying to make friends with it. Could somebody here explain why?I'm a hacker, not a sociologist. ;-) That said, I remember drowning in the X documentation until I started using different sorts of systems and trying to adapt my shell startup file(s) to those systems. HTH, Dan -- <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.tombstonezero.net/dan> An omer is a tenth of an ephah. -- Exodus 16:36. ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: Geek Gift Procrastinating? Get the perfect geek gift now! Before the Holidays pass you by. T H I N K G E E K . C O M http://www.thinkgeek.com/sf/ _______________________________________________ Fink-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-users
--
Justin C. Walker, Curmudgeon-At-Large *
Institute for General Semantics | If you're not confused,
| You're not paying attention
*--------------------------------------*-------------------------------*
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.NET email is sponsored by: Geek Gift Procrastinating?
Get the perfect geek gift now! Before the Holidays pass you by.
T H I N K G E E K . C O M http://www.thinkgeek.com/sf/
_______________________________________________
Fink-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-users
