From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Thu Jun 14 03:46:12 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0108C101AB7F for ; Thu, 14 Jun 2018 03:46:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-questions-local@be-well.ilk.org) Received: from be-well.ilk.org (be-well.ilk.org [23.30.133.173]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A33EE6FCAE for ; Thu, 14 Jun 2018 03:46:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-questions-local@be-well.ilk.org) Received: from lowell-desk.lan (router.lan [172.30.250.2]) by be-well.ilk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EA0833C83; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 23:46:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: by lowell-desk.lan (Postfix, from userid 1147) id 1A2D339822; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 23:46:02 -0400 (EDT) From: Lowell Gilbert To: Polytropon Cc: mayuresh@kathe.in, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: mailx anyone? References: <70677739ac5a415c5004ea551a7458b0@kathe.in> <7b3cc5ce196fd216ccdd76fb340a2492@kathe.in> <20180613204623.3705ae36.freebsd@edvax.de> Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 23:46:02 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20180613204623.3705ae36.freebsd@edvax.de> (Polytropon's message of "Wed, 13 Jun 2018 20:46:23 +0200") Message-ID: <44po0uyqrp.fsf@lowell-desk.lan> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 03:46:12 -0000 Polytropon writes: > On Wed, 13 Jun 2018 23:13:13 +0530, Mayuresh Kathe wrote: >> On 2018-06-13 09:37 PM, Matthew Seaman wrote: >> > On 13/06/2018 16:48, Mayuresh Kathe wrote: >> >> does anyone on this list still use mailx? >> >> if not regularly, at-least intermittently? >> > >> > Given that mail(1) is part of the FreeBSD base system and is pretty >> > much the same thing as mailx(1), then probably not that many will use >> > mailx(1). mail(1) is something I do use intermittently. >> >> mailx is just a link to mail. :-) > > It is actually the same file; check with "ls -li". :-) Which doesn't mean it has the same behaviour if called by different names. [See: 'w' vs. 'uptime'] In this case, though, I thought they were supposed to behave the same way in either case, and I can't find any reason to think otherwise.