From owner-freebsd-hackers Sat Dec 31 07:55:22 1994 Return-Path: hackers-owner Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) id HAA17103 for hackers-outgoing; Sat, 31 Dec 1994 07:55:22 -0800 Received: from godzilla.zeta.org.au (godzilla.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.34]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) with ESMTP id HAA17097 for ; Sat, 31 Dec 1994 07:55:17 -0800 Received: (from bde@localhost) by godzilla.zeta.org.au (8.6.9/8.6.9) id CAA00522; Sun, 1 Jan 1995 02:53:30 +1100 Date: Sun, 1 Jan 1995 02:53:30 +1100 From: Bruce Evans Message-Id: <199412311553.CAA00522@godzilla.zeta.org.au> To: dgy@seagull.rtd.com, jkh@time.cdrom.com Subject: Re: sed bugs Cc: freebsd-hackers@freefall.cdrom.com Sender: hackers-owner@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk >No overriding reason.. Our rule of thumb is to take a BSD tool (or >non GPL'd, at least) if it's equivalent to the GNU tool. If a GNU ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ if it sort of works >tool is the only or clearly superior solution, we have no problem with ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^delete >adopting it.. Most basic gnu utilities are clearly superior. I miss having a cp that preserves symlinks, a mv that works across file systems in all cases, a `locate' that supports multiple databases, ... The basic gnu utilities have some problems under 2.0. They don't support new features such as file system flags and POSIXish symlinks. Bruce