Re: find -lname and -ilname implemented
- From: Julian Elischer <julian@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 10:47:38 -0800
David O'Brien wrote:
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 10:33:41PM +0200, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:On 2008-02-23 16:48, "M. Warner Losh" <imp@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:This knee-jerk reaction against gnu find functionality baffles me.So should I expect similar knee-jerk reactions to the just committed
The changes are trivial and make FreeBSD more compatible. It is such
an obvious no-brainer that I frankly didn't expect anybody to bat an
eye.
`finger compatibility' option to implement du -l for hardlinks?
You added a new useful feature - and you based the option letter on
prior-art (and resumable doen't conflict with POSIX).
can we form an anti-knee-jerk cabal that can get a quorum when needed?
_______________________________________________
freebsd-hackers@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx"
- References:
- find -lname and -ilname implemented
- From: Jonathan McKeown
- Re: find -lname and -ilname implemented
- From: M. Warner Losh
- Re: find -lname and -ilname implemented
- From: Giorgos Keramidas
- Re: find -lname and -ilname implemented
- From: David O'Brien
- find -lname and -ilname implemented
- Prev by Date: Re: non-blocking io, EINTR
- Next by Date: Re: synchronous freebsd print
- Previous by thread: Re: find -lname and -ilname implemented
- Next by thread: Re: find -lname and -ilname implemented
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
