Re: Re: The vi editor causes brain damage

2007-08-19 Thread Jose Celestino
Words by Marc Perkel [Sun, Aug 19, 2007 at 06:22:37AM -0700]:
> 
> --- Willy Tarreau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, Aug 19, 2007 at 09:15:22AM +0200, Jiri Slaby
> > wrote:
> > > Marc Perkel napsal(a):
> > > > Let me give you and example of the difference
> > between
> > > > Linux open source world brain damaged thinking
> > and
> > > > what it's like out here in the real world.
> > > > 
> > > > Go to a directory with 10k files and type:
> > > > 
> > > > rm *
> > > > 
> > > > What do you get?
> > > > 
> > > > /bin/rm: Argument list too long
> > > 
> > > What does this have to do with rm command?
> > 
> > Nothing, and no more with linux development. Marc
> > confuses shell and rm.
> > Under DOS, when he types "del *", the shell calls
> > the builtin function
> > "del" and passes it only one argument "*". The del
> > function is then
> > responsible for iterating through the files using
> > getfirst/getnext.
> > 
> > This is also why mostly only builtin shell commands
> > support "*", while
> > most external commands do not support it, since they
> > have to re-implement
> > the same code to iterate through the files (try
> > "debug c*.com", it will
> > not work).
> > 
> > Under unix, the shell resolves "*" and passes the
> > 1 file names to
> > the "rm" command. Now, execve() may fail because
> > 1 names in arguments
> > can require too much memory. That's why find and
> > xargs were invented!
> > 
> > The solution is easy : find . -maxdepth 1 | xargs rm
> > 
> > So this has nothing to do with rm, nor with rm being
> > open-source, and
> > even less with rm being written with vi, and Marc's
> > rant is totally
> > wrong and off-topic. Maybe he was drunk when
> > posting, or maybe someone
> > used his keyboard to make him look like a complete
> > fool. Or maybe he
> > really is.
> > 
> > Willy
> > (please do not follow up on this OT thread,
> > responses to /dev/null)
> > 
> 
> The important point that you are missing here is that
> the Linux world is willing to live with an rm command
> that is broken and the Windows and DOS world isn't.
> This isn't about the rm command it's about programming
> standards. It's about that the Linux community isn't
> committed to getting it right.
> 

Yuhu! The rm command isn't broken (nothing is broken related to this).
Have you been reading? Can you even (read)?

Fscking troll.

-- 
Jose Celestino

http://www.msversus.org/ ; http://techp.org/petition/show/1
http://www.vinc17.org/noswpat.en.html

"And on the trillionth day, Man created Gods." -- Thomas D. Pate
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/


Re: Re: The vi editor causes brain damage

2007-08-19 Thread Jose Celestino
Words by Marc Perkel [Sun, Aug 19, 2007 at 06:22:37AM -0700]:
 
 --- Willy Tarreau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
  On Sun, Aug 19, 2007 at 09:15:22AM +0200, Jiri Slaby
  wrote:
   Marc Perkel napsal(a):
Let me give you and example of the difference
  between
Linux open source world brain damaged thinking
  and
what it's like out here in the real world.

Go to a directory with 10k files and type:

rm *

What do you get?

/bin/rm: Argument list too long
   
   What does this have to do with rm command?
  
  Nothing, and no more with linux development. Marc
  confuses shell and rm.
  Under DOS, when he types del *, the shell calls
  the builtin function
  del and passes it only one argument *. The del
  function is then
  responsible for iterating through the files using
  getfirst/getnext.
  
  This is also why mostly only builtin shell commands
  support *, while
  most external commands do not support it, since they
  have to re-implement
  the same code to iterate through the files (try
  debug c*.com, it will
  not work).
  
  Under unix, the shell resolves * and passes the
  1 file names to
  the rm command. Now, execve() may fail because
  1 names in arguments
  can require too much memory. That's why find and
  xargs were invented!
  
  The solution is easy : find . -maxdepth 1 | xargs rm
  
  So this has nothing to do with rm, nor with rm being
  open-source, and
  even less with rm being written with vi, and Marc's
  rant is totally
  wrong and off-topic. Maybe he was drunk when
  posting, or maybe someone
  used his keyboard to make him look like a complete
  fool. Or maybe he
  really is.
  
  Willy
  (please do not follow up on this OT thread,
  responses to /dev/null)
  
 
 The important point that you are missing here is that
 the Linux world is willing to live with an rm command
 that is broken and the Windows and DOS world isn't.
 This isn't about the rm command it's about programming
 standards. It's about that the Linux community isn't
 committed to getting it right.
 

Yuhu! The rm command isn't broken (nothing is broken related to this).
Have you been reading? Can you even (read)?

Fscking troll.

-- 
Jose Celestino

http://www.msversus.org/ ; http://techp.org/petition/show/1
http://www.vinc17.org/noswpat.en.html

And on the trillionth day, Man created Gods. -- Thomas D. Pate
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/