Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 22:09:25 +0200 (SAT) From: Robert Nordier <rnordier@iafrica.com> To: tcg@ime.net Cc: rnordier@iafrica.com, dgy@rtd.com, questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: perhaps i am just stupid. Message-ID: <199608072009.WAA01015@eac.iafrica.com> In-Reply-To: <3208EC03.7D5F@ime.net> from "Gary Chrysler" at Aug 7, 96 03:18:27 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Gary Chrysler wrote: > > > > Another complication: DOS "sort" is little-used, broken, and may > > > > not be in the PATH. > > > > > > I see no need for that ... ... :) > > > I reley on sort as much as I reley on find. (ms-dos's) > > > > DOS sort is evil and DOS find is more evil. :) > > > > On UNIX/BSD, assuming /usr/bin/sort and /usr/bin/fgrep is reasonable. > > I think corresponding DOS assumptions are much riskier. > > Like I said, I see no reason to sort it anyways. > > Yes, dos find and sort are brain dead! Misinterpreted your DOS sort/find comment: apologies. However, unless some sorting takes place, the files may end up being processed out of order. This may not be a likely problem, but it is a sufficiently possible one to need taking into account. I actually had to do a DOS cksum-like clone, years ago, and for compatibility it was necessary to sort the file args during the globbing. Unfortunately this is something ports from UNIX frequently don't take into account. -- Robert Nordier
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199608072009.WAA01015>