SVR3.0 vs BSD4.3
Bruce G. Barnett
barnett at vdsvax.steinmetz.ge.com
Tue Mar 22 21:53:09 AEST 1988
In article <10025 at steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP> davidsen at crdos1.UUCP
(bill davidsen) writes:
|
| I must confess I think BSD names are
|too much of a good thing... do we really need names longer than the data
|in the file? Most sites trim the filenames to either 1k or something
|smaller, and I doubt that 1% of a ll files in the world have names
|longer than some reasonable size, such as 64 or even 32 characters.
The software I use to archive USENET articles would be completely
unmanageable if limited to 14 character names. Each file is stored
under the message ID. If I had to truncate the filenames, then I would
have several articles trying to occuply the same name.
Any suggestions to hash the message ID into some 14 character encoding
will be cheerfully met with a flame thrower. :-)
I also use filenames as keywords. For instance, I have an archive of
accounting reports, where the filename is of the format
<machine>-<report>.<Month>_date-<AMorPM>
I use the shell characters as a first level grep, allowing constructs
like
grep pattern *patterna*patternb*
I also don't have to worry about creating backup files by adding
a ".orig" to the original filename.
--
Bruce G. Barnett <barnett at ge-crd.ARPA> <barnett at steinmetz.UUCP>
uunet!steinmetz!barnett
More information about the Comp.unix.wizards
mailing list