Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2008 15:49:13 -0600 From: Brooks Davis <brooks@freebsd.org> To: Mike Meyer <mwm-keyword-freebsdhackers2.e313df@mired.org> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: find -lname and -ilname implemented Message-ID: <20080223214913.GE39699@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> In-Reply-To: <20080223131937.182373b2@bhuda.mired.org> References: <20080222.225937.-146245356.imp@bsdimp.com> <20080223.000308.686168314.imp@bsdimp.com> <20080223123556.3eee709d@bhuda.mired.org> <20080223.110047.-397883947.imp@bsdimp.com> <20080223131937.182373b2@bhuda.mired.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--EXKGNeO8l0xGFBjy Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 01:19:37PM -0500, Mike Meyer wrote: > On Sat, 23 Feb 2008 11:00:47 -0700 (MST) "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com= > wrote: >=20 > > In message: <20080223123556.3eee709d@bhuda.mired.org> > > Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> writes: > > : On Sat, 23 Feb 2008 00:03:08 -0700 (MST) "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp= =2Ecom> wrote: > > :=20 > > : > Sorry to be lame and follow up to my original email, but Ruslan was > > : > way too quick to give me feedback :-) > > : >=20 > > : > I also did a few more of the really easy ones, and added a list of > > : > ones that we haven't implemented yet. > > : >=20 > > : > Comments? > > :=20 > > : How about a question: why are you turning the FreeBSD find into the > > : GNU find? The changes in the first patch looked like they added real > > : functionality that wasn't available in other tools. These seem to be > > : gratuitous changes to make things compatible with GNU. > >=20 > > The changes aren't gratuitous. They are well thought out to ensure > > maximum compatibility. >=20 > That they add no new functionality, but only exist to make things > compatible with GNU are what make them gratuitous to me. >=20 > > It is yet another barrier to entry for people converting from Linux to > > FreeBSD. There's lots of useful scripts that have been written for > > the embedded world that, sadly, assume more functionality in our tools > > than are present. They don't always do nice autoconf things to find > > the right tool to use. The trivial differences between gnu find and > > our find serve no real purpose. >=20 > The problem with this argument is that there are no limits on it, > other than the developers definition of "trivial". OS X has already > carried this argument to the point that they've replaced /bin/sh with > bash. >=20 > While I understand that it's easier to fix the BSD find, have you > tried filing bug reports with patches for the tools that assume GNU > find? That would help people outside the BSD community as well. I think you may underestimate the value of compatibility. For example, I think a lot of the successes bsdtar is having are due to the fact that it's as much of a dropin replacement for gnutar is possible. If we want to increase our market share one of the ways we can do it is to make things easier for people who are interested in adopting our technologies for what ever reason. If we can spend a few KB here and there to make their transition easier, I think it's well worth it. -- Brooks --EXKGNeO8l0xGFBjy Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFHwJTZXY6L6fI4GtQRAhGyAKDiwBJqpq5Rxn6uvdTxVomg/AxAjQCfbht1 2nIq6/eJFEuh/2Tsm0mn8m8= =+2qK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --EXKGNeO8l0xGFBjy--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080223214913.GE39699>