On Mar 25, 2008, at 11:50 AM, Ralph Shumaker wrote:
I know that Lan didn't ask this directly, but I think he's wondering why only two output channels were implemented. At least *I* am wondering that. Why not stout, sterr, and stmisc?
The system was designed with the basic tools to let you do whatever you needed to do.
Having stdin, stdout and stderr was considered the minimum. IIRC, that's filehandles 0, 1 and 2 (respectively). Want another one? Open a third filehandle. Nominally, this will need to not be the same as 0, 1 and 2, but this is where named pipes and fifos and devices and just plain old files come in.
Fault the developer of the tool whose output is crap for being lazy, not the operating system for lacking the particular tone of bell or pitch of whistle you want.
:D Gregory -- Gregory K. Ruiz-Ade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> OpenPGP Key ID: EAF4844B keyserver: pgpkeys.mit.edu -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
