From owner-freebsd-current Sat Sep 9 17:01:36 1995 Return-Path: current-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id RAA06975 for current-outgoing; Sat, 9 Sep 1995 17:01:36 -0700 Received: from mailhub.cts.com (root@mailhub.cts.com [192.188.72.25]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with SMTP id RAA06969 for ; Sat, 9 Sep 1995 17:01:35 -0700 Received: from io.cts.com by mailhub.cts.com with smtp (Smail3.1.29.1 #19) id m0srZph-000UzTC; Sat, 9 Sep 95 17:01 PDT Received: (from root@localhost) by io.cts.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) id RAA08139 for current@freebsd.org; Sat, 9 Sep 1995 17:01:47 -0700 From: Morgan Davis Message-Id: <199509100001.RAA08139@io.cts.com> Subject: whereis To: current@freebsd.org Date: Sat, 9 Sep 1995 17:01:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 618 Sender: current-owner@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk I've often wondered why the 'whereis' command doesn't use your $PATH in addition to the default path it searches. Is there some compelling reason for not doing this? What I'd like to see is a list of all matches to a program I'm looking for to see if there are more than one in my search path. And, it would follow my $PATH so I know the order that will be used when entered. That seems to make more sense than the way it works now, and is certainly safer. I'm sure there are historical reasons for this, but would not a extra flag (like -a for "all" or perhaps "alternate") make sense to add this functionality?