Renaming "yes" to "adnauseam"
sahayman at iuvax.cs.indiana.edu
sahayman at iuvax.cs.indiana.edu
Fri Sep 15 06:01:09 AEST 1989
From: Steve Hayman <sahayman at iuvax.cs.indiana.edu>
I do remember the reasons why "yes" was renamed, and at one point
I agreed with them. But really, all the change is trying to do
is protect the handful of people who might ever type "yes"
on a hardcopy terminal. Those people - operators, whoever - ought
to make their own alias or use a PATH that picks up a "fixed" version
of yes.
> Perhaps a better change would have been to make "yes"
> not work if output is to a tty?
There might still be reasons to make "yes" work when output is
to a tty. maybe I'm testing something and need a stream of
output to the screen. Who's to say? I think it would be better
to leave the stock /usr/ucb/yes alone. Some people might like it the
way it is.
More information about the Comp.unix
mailing list