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