Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!steinmetz!dawn!stpeters From: stpeters@dawn.steinmetz (Dick St.Peters) Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions Subject: Re: RE: UNIX NAME ABBREVIATIONS Message-ID: <7996@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP> Date: Fri, 27-Nov-87 17:00:26 EST Article-I.D.: steinmet.7996 Posted: Fri Nov 27 17:00:26 1987 Date-Received: Sun, 29-Nov-87 23:32:24 EST References: <10376@brl-adm.ARPA> <16550@topaz.rutgers.edu> <388@cogen.UUCP> <6706@brl-smoke.ARPA> Sender: root@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP Reply-To: dawn!stpeters@steinmetz.UUCP (Dick St.Peters) Organization: General Electric CRD, Schenectady, NY Lines: 18 In article <6706@brl-smoke.ARPA> gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB)) writes: >Yes, old UNIX shells used a separate process whose executable was named >"glob" to perform "wildcard" expansion. Too bad this isn't still the case. I'd love to be able to write my own personalizwd glob, not to mention a username-dependent glob - say one that knew which users needed/wanted hand-holding protection. I don't want to open the whole "rm *" debate again (please!), but as UNIX displaces VMS here, being able to easily protect reluctant new users until we're *sure* they understand the dangers would help avoid a lot of long-lasting first-impression (first-disaster) bad feelings. (Scripts and such just don't cut it ... see the "rm *" debates.) -- Dick St.Peters GE Corporate R&D, Schenectady, NY stpeters@ge-crd.arpa uunet!steinmetz!stpeters