Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 12:39:23 +0200 From: "Chris J. Mutter" <cjm@terminal.sil.at> To: renaud@waldura.org (Renaud Waldura) Cc: ras@e-gerbil.net (Richard A. Steenbergen), gcorcoran@lucent.com, mph@astro.caltech.edu, freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: "ifconfig" == "ifconfig -a" Message-ID: <200007191039.MAA19208@terminal.sil.at> In-Reply-To: renaud's message of Wed, 19 Jul 0100 01:56:16 %2B0200. <200007182356.BAA14966@guppy.evolunet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > On Tue, 18 Jul 2000, Gary T. Corcoran wrote: > > > > > Hmmm.... what about having "route" with no parameters just > > > give a helpful message, something like "To see the current > > > routing table, use the netstat(1) command.". ?? > > > > If nothing else, it is in no way intuitive that "route" says nothing about > > how to view the current routing table. This is one of the most common new > > FreeBSD user questions I hear. At a minimium, something should be hinted > > at in the man page. > > And in an ideal world, the "route" command should do what its name suggests: deal > with routes, and that includes printing them IMHO. > > I hate code/functionnality duplication as much as the next guy, but having to > call a command totally unrelated to "route" to display the routing table (ie. netstat) > has always struck me as a gratuitous twist. > > I cast my vote for a "route print". [x] against NT-ish "route print" later, cjm -- SILVER SERVER \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\ \\ \ cjm@sil.at, cjm@enemy.org, neo@bsdger.org www.sil.at --PGP-Key-ID: 0xA941452D | If I could PING you, and you could PING me, -------------------------| then we were both on the Internet - RFC1287 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200007191039.MAA19208>