Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site mb2c.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!mb2c!jnj
From: jnj@mb2c.UUCP (Jim Jackson)
Newsgroups: net.micro.att
Subject: Re: UNIX PC command surprises...
Message-ID: <596@mb2c.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 24-Mar-86 10:49:17 EST
Article-I.D.: mb2c.596
Posted: Mon Mar 24 10:49:17 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 25-Mar-86 04:59:03 EST
References: <351@hropus.UUCP> <888@kitty.UUCP>
Organization: Michigan Bell, Southfield, MI
Lines: 17

> In article <351@hropus.UUCP>, jrw@hropus.UUCP (Jim Webb) writes:
> > 	Has anyone else out there noticed that on the "7300" the
> > 	grep, egrep, and fgrep commands are IDENTICAL.  The other
> > 	day I did an egrep "nproc|NPROC" or some such thing and
> > 	it failed!  A quick cmp of grep and egrep yielded no 
> > 	differences, in fact, grep and fgrep are linked together.
> > 
> > 	Boy, and to think that people pay extra to get egrep
> > 	with the Development Set....
> 
> 	Aw, come on!  *THINK*  I'm suprised that you haven't discovered that
> ``edit'', ``ex'', and ``vi'' are also identical and are linked together.  Does
> that mean they are the same?

Not to mention cp, ln and mv.  All one program that behaves differently
depending on how the program is called.