Date: Sat, 11 Jul 1998 11:46:54 -0400 (EDT) From: Charles Youse <cyouse@artemis.syncom.net> To: Bakul Shah <bakul@torrentnet.com> Cc: joelh@gnu.org, dchapes@ddm.on.ca, rminnich@Sarnoff.COM, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Improvemnet of ln(1). Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.3.96.980711114048.7449A-100000@artemis.syncom.net> In-Reply-To: <199807111442.KAA19474@chai.torrentnet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 11 Jul 1998, Bakul Shah wrote: > For interactive use, alias ln to `ln -w' to warn you. If you > change the default behavior of ln, you *will* break scripts. > Unlike editors, ln is more likely to be used in scripts than > interactively (well, it is so for most people). I fail to see how. An extra line output to stderr is going to break scripts? Can you provide an example? > Bottom line: backward compatibility is a good program design. Well, not always. Compare Windows/DOS. Chuck To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.NEB.3.96.980711114048.7449A-100000>