# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2002-09-27 18:10:04 +0200:
> Roman Neuhauser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > # [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2002-09-27 17:15:00 +0200:
> > > That wouldn't make it any more portable. Bugging the Open Group
> > > _might_ be more useful.
> >
> > right.
> >
> > > But then again, it's against the UNIX philosophy. In UNIX,
> > > you've got a tool for every job, and the power of the system
> > > comes from combining those tools. There is no need to duplicate
> > > functionality in multiple tools.
> >
> > according to this logic find(1) shouldn't have any primaries at all.
> >
>
> Right. :-)
>
> Well, almost. Those primaries which operate on the properties of the
> inodes are required (-perm, -mtime etc.).
not really: ls(1).
> Also, some primaries are really required for efficiency, e.g. -prune.
> But -iname is really just unnecessary bloat, IMO.
--
begin 666 nonexistent.vbs
FreeBSD 4.7-RC
6:15PM up 10 days, 1:29, 12 users, load averages: 0.01, 0.02, 0.00
end
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
