From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Sep 7 05:08:22 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8F3D16A4DE for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2006 05:08:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from drosih@rpi.edu) Received: from smtp6.server.rpi.edu (smtp6.server.rpi.edu [128.113.2.226]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6246B43D46 for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2006 05:08:22 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from drosih@rpi.edu) Received: from [128.113.24.47] (gilead.netel.rpi.edu [128.113.24.47]) by smtp6.server.rpi.edu (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k8758Juc024544; Thu, 7 Sep 2006 01:08:21 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20060907030913.GN87762@wjv.com> References: <20060906120042.9E9DB16A532@hub.freebsd.org> <20060907030913.GN87762@wjv.com> Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2006 01:08:18 -0400 To: bv@wjv.com, freebsd-current@freebsd.org From: Garance A Drosihn Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-CanItPRO-Stream: default X-RPI-SA-Score: undef - spam-scanning disabled X-Scanned-By: CanIt (www . canit . ca) Cc: Subject: Re: Adding a 'D - Date' option to 'cat' X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2006 05:08:22 -0000 At 11:09 PM -0400 9/6/06, Bill Vermillion wrote: > >That's pretty much the basic Unix philosophy - a lot of small >programs that can be chained together to do almost anything you can >imagine, instead of putting all the POSSIBLE needed options into >each program that MAY or MAY NOT need it. Well, the proposed option to `cat' is already dead, but just as an aside: Notice what happens when some issue like this comes up. The unix philosophy is supposedly to champion lots of small utility programs. An issue like Julian's comes up, where no *small*, well-designed utility can get the job done. What does everyone suggest? Why, "Just load up a turing-complete multi-megabyte executable like Perl [which FreeBSD won't even include in the base OS because it's too much of a hassle], and then write/debug your own perl script which can handle your job!". Uh, perl is not a small utility program. The fact is that unix doesn't really deliver on it's own philosophy. Unix wizards constantly punt user questions off to *massive* programs which have a billion options. There is something very inconsistent in that. -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@gilead.netel.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu