Newsgroups: comp.bugs.sys5
Path: utzoo!henry
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: small bug in who(1) of SVR3
Message-ID: <1991Jan13.004843.18650@zoo.toronto.edu>
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
References: <9101091725.AA15013@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> <1991Jan10.130738.10194@unhtel.uucp> <14818@smoke.brl.mil> <18896@rpp386.cactus.org>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 1991 00:48:43 GMT

In article <18896@rpp386.cactus.org> jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F Haugh II) writes:
>... Why should I be forced to... use pipes (ala "who | 
>cut -d' ' -f1 | pr -6 -l1) to get the same results as "who -q"?

Because they are the simplest and cheapest way to get the desired results?
I don't care how easy it was to add the "-q" option, it was a waste of the
programmer's time.  A shell program using pipes could have been written in
seconds, solving the problem without messing around with "who".

There seems to be a pervasive delusion that the only two ways things can
be done are (a) add every conceivable option to the C program or (b) force
the user to type long sequences using pipes.  The correct approach, when
such functionality is often used, is to package it up in a system-supplied
shell file.
-- 
If the Space Shuttle was the answer,   | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
what was the question?                 |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu   utzoo!henry