Date: Sat, 13 Dec 1997 10:57:11 +0100 (MET) From: Wolfgang Helbig <helbig@Informatik.BA-Stuttgart.DE> To: pst@shockwave.com (Paul Traina) Cc: helbig@Informatik.BA-Stuttgart.DE, adam@veda.is, helbig@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-usrbin@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.bin/cal cal.1 Message-ID: <199712130957.KAA00340@rvc1.informatik.ba-stuttgart.de> In-Reply-To: <199712130647.WAA03452@precipice.shockwave.com> from Paul Traina at "Dec 12, 97 10:47:14 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I think ncal as a port would be a mighty fine thing. In fact, I think ncal OK, you won :-) But ... ncal(1) depends on the little library /usr/src/lib/libcalendar which I recently put into -current, so ncal wouldn't build in FreeBSD-2.2.x unless the library is ported as well. > would be just fine if the default mode was cal(1) compatible. I have no > problems with extending unix, but I do have a teensy one with changing > defaults that have existed since the dawn of history (1970.1.1 or Jan 1 1970 > for us > happy-go-lucky Americans). > > I hate cal(1), but I'm used to its stupidities now. While I can adapt, > silly programs that call it for output may not. I get that point. So how about this: If called "cal", "ncal" would behave like "cal", otherwise like "ncal"--implemented via a hard link from /usr/bin/cal to /usr/bin/ncal. Is that acceptable? Wolfgang
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199712130957.KAA00340>