Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1a 12/4/83; site rlgvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!harpo!seismo!rlgvax!guy
From: guy@rlgvax.UUCP (Guy Harris)
Newsgroups: net.cog-eng
Subject: Re: name=value or -n value?
Message-ID: <1828@rlgvax.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 25-Mar-84 14:22:57 EST
Article-I.D.: rlgvax.1828
Posted: Sun Mar 25 14:22:57 1984
Date-Received: Mon, 26-Mar-84 20:41:22 EST
References: <2831@fortune.UUCP>
Organization: CCI Office Systems Group, Reston, VA
Lines: 22

The AT&T card also contained the L.sys file entry for "nwuxd" (by the way,
on my card "unixsys", as in "nwuxd!unixsys", was all lower-case); it was

nwuxd Any ACU 1200 13122601844 in-BREAK-in-BREAK-in unixml word bellmail

or, for those of you less fortunate,

nwuxd Any ACU 300 13122601844 in-BREAK-in-BREAK-in unixml word bellmail

(also, you put the Death Star in the wrong corner - it was in the upper left
corner :-))

My preferences are the same as Rob's; the only advantages of the AT&T
standard are 1) less typing, because you have all those "lovely" one-character
flag names (Data General had that in RDOS but dumped it in AOS in favor of
longer names; DEC had it in RT-11 and had two-character flags in RSX but
dumped it in VMS in favor of longer names) and 2) it's compatible with the
commands that already exist.  (Assume that you had a restriction of one- or
two-character *command* names in UNIX; wouldn't that be fun?)

	Guy Harris
	{seismo,ihnp4,allegra}!rlgvax!guy