On Sep 29, Doug MacEachern wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Sep 2000, Vsevolod Ilyushchenko wrote:
> > Yes, I know. I just want to see how far I can go with the "open".
> > Besides, according to the author of the script (it's for the analog web
> > log analyzer), using open is more secure.
>
> i've never heard that before, how is it more secure? more efficient
> maybe, but doubt that its more secure.
probably a reference to the fact that you have to escape the
arguments used in something like $foo = `cat $bar` because it will
go through /bin/sh, but you can avoid that by using open/fork/exec
(or the three-argument open in perl 5.6).
jim
