From owner-freebsd-bugs  Thu Sep 13  4:20: 5 2001
Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@hub.freebsd.org
Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3543837B408
	for <freebsd-bugs@hub.freebsd.org>; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 04:20:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from gnats@localhost)
	by freefall.freebsd.org (8.11.4/8.11.4) id f8DBK2L52648;
	Thu, 13 Sep 2001 04:20:02 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from gnats)
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 04:20:02 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <200109131120.f8DBK2L52648@freefall.freebsd.org>
To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org
Cc: 
From: Dima Dorfman <dima@unixfreak.org>
Subject: Re: bin/30542: [PATCH] add -q option to shut up killall 
Reply-To: Dima Dorfman <dima@unixfreak.org>
Sender: owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <freebsd-bugs.FreeBSD.ORG>
List-Archive: <http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/> (Web Archive)
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=help> (List Instructions)
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=subscribe%20freebsd-bugs>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=unsubscribe%20freebsd-bugs>
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

The following reply was made to PR bin/30542; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Dima Dorfman <dima@unixfreak.org>
To: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>
Cc: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: bin/30542: [PATCH] add -q option to shut up killall 
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 04:19:13 -0700

 Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at> wrote:
 > >Description:
 > Somewhere (can't remember where) I saw some code that did a
 > `killall >/dev/null 2>&1` which made me think there should be
 > a -q option.
 
 Why?  That's what redirects are for.  I don't see anything wrong with
 the above construct.  It seems silly to add a "shut up" option to
 every program; if we wanted to do that, why did we have redirects and
 /dev/null in the first place?

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message