page@swan.ulowell.edu (Bob Page) (02/17/88)
mohamed@hscfvax.harvard.edu (Mohamed_el_Lozy) wrote:
>more in the UNIX tradition would be no message at all unless it failed.
Back when we only had top speed 300 baud terminals, this was a good
thing. Now, it's a good thing when you have filters and scripts
running. But for the average non-batch command on 19.2 terminals and
dedicated workstations, this isn't such a good thing. You don't ever
patch programs within a shell script, right? Or have patch as part of
a pipeline...let it be verbose.
More designers of UNIX tools should note this.
Oh, and patch args | tee patch.out | less doesn't count.
..Bob
--
Bob Page, U of Lowell CS Dept. page@swan.ulowell.edu ulowell!page
"I don't know such stuff. I just do eyes." -- from 'Blade Runner'stever@videovax.Tek.COM (Steven E. Rice, P.E.) (02/24/88)
In article <2907@swan.ulowell.edu>, Bob Page (page@swan.ulowell.edu) writes: [ deletions ] > Oh, and patch args | tee patch.out | less doesn't count. On our system, the patch commentary comes out on standard error. To control the flow, I have to use the "|&" construct: patch < patchfile |& more ^^ || Otherwise, the output flows uncontrolled. . . Steve Rice ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- * Every knee shall bow, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord! * new: stever@videovax.tv.Tek.com old: {decvax | hplabs | ihnp4 | uw-beaver}!tektronix!videovax!stever