From owner-freebsd-stable Mon Apr 30 9: 3: 9 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (mta5.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.241]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76D4537B422 for ; Mon, 30 Apr 2001 09:03:06 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from faber@lunabase.org) Received: from lunabase.org ([63.200.244.106]) by mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with ESMTP id <0GCM00H7D4HC4V@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net> for stable@FreeBSD.ORG; Mon, 30 Apr 2001 09:00:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from praxis.lunabase.org (praxis.lunabase.org [63.200.244.110]) by lunabase.org (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f3UG0jc26611; Mon, 30 Apr 2001 09:00:45 -0700 (PDT envelope-from faber@lunabase.org) Received: (from faber@localhost) by praxis.lunabase.org (8.11.3/8.11.3) id f3UG0ie30439; Mon, 30 Apr 2001 09:00:44 -0700 (PDT envelope-from faber) X-URL: http://www.lunabase.edu/~faber Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 09:00:43 -0700 From: Ted Faber Subject: Re: tail In-reply-to: <20010430110352.A646@iv.nn.kiev.ua>; from netch@iv.nn.kiev.ua on Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 11:03:52AM +0300 To: Valentin Nechayev Cc: stable@FreeBSD.ORG Message-id: <20010430090043.A30396@praxis.lunabase.org> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/signed; micalg=php-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="WIyZ46R2i8wDzkSu" Content-disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i References: <20010429222205.A29058@praxis.lunabase.org> <20010430110352.A646@iv.nn.kiev.ua> Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG --WIyZ46R2i8wDzkSu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 11:03:52AM +0300, Valentin Nechayev wrote: > Sun, Apr 29, 2001 at 22:22:05, faber (Ted Faber) wrote about "Re: tail": > > > juha@cyrus:~$ tail / > > > tail: /: Is a directory > > > More desirable behaviour, IMO. > > FYI, and maybe surprisingly, you're about to start a flame war. See, I knew better and I responded anyway. I am dumb. > > BSD > > tail and related tools have been treating directories as files for > > *many* years. > > Can you please prove nesessarity of such behavior, as really useful examples > of cat/tail of directory, or an example of needed compatibility? No, I can't. You can't prove the reverse. It's an axiom. "All entities in the file system should behave as much like a flat file as possible." You can build a fine system based on that axiom or some other. Adhering to this simple axiom rather than something more complex leads to a simpler, more elegant system, IMHO, but it's a matter of taste. That's why arguing about it is pointless, and I won't. I encourage you to spend your time more productively. --WIyZ46R2i8wDzkSu Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE67YwraUz3f+Zf+XsRAgIwAKCgSiH1isZdsrHGeHxCJ+fQJ+rZmwCg2SXU oEISSKniz4qpTyfwIiTRyck= =/Rud -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --WIyZ46R2i8wDzkSu-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message