>>Or how about the
>>fact that nearly all of the utilities now have verbose error messages,
>>even when the old terse message was sufficient?
>1. If you want to see old terse messages, issue:
> export LANG=C
> [stuff deleted]
>2. Who decides when an "old terse message is sufficient"? Were they
> sufficient to secretaries? Or just to hackers?
[LANG=C] ksh: kjj: cannot open
[LANG=En_US] 0506-764 ln: /tmp: Cannot use this command with a directory.
[LANG=C] ln : </tmp> directory
Canonicalizing all the error msgs by assigning them numbers and more
verbose explanations isn't such a bad idea, but it will hardly make
the system usable by secretaries. It does nothing to prevent an
accidental "rm *" or hide the details of the filesystem from the user.
Secretaries will run Motif and shrink-wrapped applications in
which case they will probably never [want to] use Unix shells. And they
shouldn't need to.
The big gain here will be made by IBM SEs who will now be able to
look up customers' complaints by the error number.
I haven't heard about IBM shipping *anything* on a PowerstationQuote:>Nor, apparently, does your installation want C2 security in it's
>operating system, which neither UCB nor AT&T ship today.
yet. You can buy SunOS 4.1 *today* which is B2 certified.
And AT&T is advertising System V/MLS which is B1
certified -- I don't know if it's shipping yet.
If security is important to you, you sure don't want to go with
a measly C2 rated system.
Jason Martin Levitt P.O. Box 49860 Austin, Texas 78765 (512) 459-0055
UUCP : cs.utexas.edu!hackbox!jason | the American spirit and continues to
BIX : jlevitt | show us the way to follow our dreams."
| -Ronald Reagan