Re: priorities
On Fri, 7 Dec 2007 12:28:55 +1000, Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> said:
> On Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 05:09:36PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 13:34:10 -0800, Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu>
>> said:
>> > I use "time" in benchmarking scripts.
>> I do not find the built in time to be a substitute for the good old
>> fashioned time command. Observe:
> Why are either of those reasons to have /usr/bin/time on every Debian
> machine? We're not talking about removing the package entirely...
The passage you are quoting is not meant to offer justification
for keeping time in standard. It was meant to refure the statement that
time is now a builtin in most shells.
The point I am making is that the built in command of the same
name as /usr/bin/time is a pale shade of the original, and in no way an
adequate substitute.
Now, the justification is that it has always been a part of
UNIX, as far back I I can remember (Which means about '83 -- though I
honestly only recall the executable /usr/bin/time on Ultrix, circa
'88).
Frankly, I suggest we look at the list of Unix commands as
specified by the SUS -- which can also be seen at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Unix_programs
From that page, time has been in UNIX since AT&T version 3.
So -- how many of the standard unix commands as defined by that
page are not part of the standard section?
manoj
--
The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its
limits.
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: