Q: lseek returns long or int? (BSD 4.2)

[Henry Spencer]

A number of people have taken me to task for calling the Berkeley
people "morons".  (Probably more than I realize; news feed to Eastern
Canada has been extremely erratic for the last week or two and the
comments I've been getting have been the ones sent by private mail.)
On reflection, they are half-right; a partial apology and clarification
is in order.  I have considerable respect for certain specific Berkeley
and ex-Berkeley people, and apologize for hitting them with my blanket
condemnation.  Bill Joy and Sam Leffler come to mind; there are others.

This isn't a complete retraction, because changing the return type of
lseek remains an imbecilic act.  Specific Berkeley people have plenty
of ability and brains; it's the collective result that reeks.  Berkeley
as a whole cannot seem to leave anything alone, even when it works fine
and shouldn't be messed with.  I don't deny that they have done many
valuable and useful things; the problem is that they've done many stupid
and harmful things as well, and some of them don't seem to be able to
tell the difference.

Please don't flame at me about the wonders of Berklix until you've fixed
your definition of lseek() to be compatible with UNIX.
-- 
				Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
				{allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!henry