twb@cbnewsh.att.com (thomas.w.beattie) (03/20/91)
In article <3432@sixhub.UUCP> ibmbin-request@crdgw1.crd.ge.com writes: > I said I'd never post another version of ls again, but this one is >small, very versatile, and may be used in DOS or OS/2. This version of ls doesn't handle the DOS SWITCHAR at all. It insists on options (flags, switches) being introduced by a hyphen. It also marks directories with forward slashes rather than the backslashes actually used under DOS. >Reviewed by gupta!few@sun.com, (author): Reviewed by the author?? What good is that?? --- Tom Beattie att!hoqaa!twb t.w.beattie@att.com
davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (Wm E. Davidsen Jr) (03/25/91)
In article <1991Mar19.212356.18971@cbnewsh.att.com> twb@cbnewsh.att.com (thomas.w.beattie) writes: | This version of ls doesn't handle the DOS SWITCHAR at all. | It insists on options (flags, switches) being introduced by a hyphen. | It also marks directories with forward slashes rather than the backslashes | actually used under DOS. a) the intro says it's compatible with UNIX V.3.2 ls, which uses hyphens, forward slashes, and does not use SWITCHAR. b) A carefult reading of DOS manuals will inform you that *DOS* accepts both forward and backward slashes, which *command.com* wants backslashes so the options can be marked with a foreslash, like CP/M. | >Reviewed by gupta!few@sun.com, (author): | | Reviewed by the author?? | What good is that?? Who better knows what the program does? If every submission came with a useful and truthful description of the program, I'd just try the program and not have to write the reviews on any of them. -- bill davidsen - davidsen@sixhub.uucp (uunet!crdgw1!sixhub!davidsen) sysop *IX BBS and Public Access UNIX moderator of comp.binaries.ibm.pc and 80386 mailing list "Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me
twb@cbnewsh.att.com (thomas.w.beattie) (03/26/91)
In article <3486@sixhub.UUCP> davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes: >In article <1991Mar19.212356.18971@cbnewsh.att.com> twb@cbnewsh.att.com (thomas.w.beattie) writes: > >| This version of ls doesn't handle the DOS SWITCHAR at all. >| It insists on options (flags, switches) being introduced by a hyphen. > > a) the intro says it's compatible with UNIX V.3.2 ls, which uses >hyphens, forward slashes, and does not use SWITCHAR. So what? It is still desirable to be compatible with the environment the utility will be USED in. This deficiency should at least be mentioned in the review, but apparently there is no independent review. >| >Reviewed by gupta!few@sun.com, (author): >| >| Reviewed by the author?? >| What good is that?? > > Who better knows what the program does? If every submission came with >a useful and truthful description of the program, I'd just try the >program and not have to write the reviews on any of them. Do you get a lot of submissions with no description of what they do? No docs at all? I thought the review process included evaluating the performance and utility of the submission. Since when are authors the best source of "a useful and truthful description of the program." --- Tom Beattie att!hoqaa!twb t.w.beattie@att.com
davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (Wm E. Davidsen Jr) (03/27/91)
In article <1991Mar25.191951.3590@cbnewsh.att.com> twb@cbnewsh.att.com (thomas.w.beattie) writes: | Do you get a lot of submissions with no description of what they do? Yes, roughly 60%, although I've been beating on people for info lately. | No docs at all? That's getting better, too, since I starting rejecting stuff for that reason. I still get it, you just don't ever see it. | | I thought the review process included evaluating the performance and utility | of the submission. Since when are authors the best source of "a useful and | truthful description of the program." I still run a check on the program, I just don't write the anymore if the submitter gives me a reasonable description of the program. Note that I posted it in spite of the fact I decided we didn't need more UNIX-like utilities. You can consider that a one sentence endorsement of what the author said. Many of the author or submitter reviews have either an intro or snide comments inserted throughout. And if I agree with the info I let it go as is. You think I should spend more time than I do already? -- bill davidsen - davidsen@sixhub.uucp (uunet!crdgw1!sixhub!davidsen) sysop *IX BBS and Public Access UNIX moderator of comp.binaries.ibm.pc and 80386 mailing list "Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me