Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Blog | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Greg Galperin <grg22 at ai.mit.edu> writes: > Trying to bring some focus, you think that it's reasonable for scripts > to assume that the user didn't customize noclobber, one of the twenty > (give or take, depending on your shell version) bash "shell options." > I disagree. Those twenty shell options are there explicitly so the > users can customize them, and I believe it's a bad assumption and poor First of all, bash is essentially a superset of the bourne shell, and is expected to run bourne shell scripts correctly. "noclobber" is not part of the bourne shell, and scripts written for that over the past 30+ years shouldn't have to be rewritten to account for this. Second, your argument applies to any other baby-proofing options that might be added to bash in the future. I don't agree with the argument that a script I wrote in 1985 is badly coded merely because it fails to explicitly check for an environment variable that will be added to bash in 2005. - -- John Abreau / Executive Director, Boston Linux & Unix Email jabr at blu.org / WWW http://www.abreau.net / PGP-Key-ID 0xD5C7B5D9 PGP-Key-Fingerprint 72 FB 39 4F 3C 3B D6 5B E0 C8 5A 6E F1 2C BE 99 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh version 2.6 02/09/2003 iQCVAwUBPlVLxVV9A5rVx7XZAQKRdAQAlADm7MwfCXeXaKmi4wbPGq5jCG1OBo1R ARFJwI8m2vkqOrSkbldrDa6npkjMNoLr/4Ux+ClZKJRLfGEehu9HpGrjMoWsf44F J1q2t77e2z/t9OzbnPwKP2WQo5bj0EvaQncnvf45+nKvejsjekOqm9TnrPJCM5VW hlmgOxe9zeQ= =gcPS -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |