4 ms·

Thank you for this. It validates and reaffirms my hate of GNU. GNU is not UNIX, and no amount of "freedom" peddling changes the fact that it purposely violates

by Annatar 10y ago

Thank you for this. It validates and reaffirms my hate of GNU. GNU is not UNIX, and no amount of "freedom" peddling changes the fact that it purposely violates UNIX principles. The only thing that could change that is their code (for example ditching info in favor of man pages, removing the z option in GNU tar, or dropping --long-options), and that's one thing they'll never change. I'm so glad I don't have to put up with the likes of Stallman "setting me free" by removing features GNU/Linux doesn't support.

icebraining 10y ago
Is there any non-dead UNIX that doesn't, nowadays? The BSD tar also has -z, as does SmartOS. As much as I enjoy "cat -v considered harmful", it seems the battle is lost for UNIX itself. http://harmful.cat-v.org/cat-v/ http://harmful.cat-v.org/cat-v/
- Annatar 10y ago
  At least on FreeBSD, I'm on BSD (don't have to use GNU), and on illumos / SmartOS I'm on AT&T System V release 4.0. As long as those alternatives exist GNU holds no power over me and provides no value that I care about, or need. Both BSD and SmartOS are free software.
crististm 10y ago
Remove z option in tar? Where did that come from?
- Annatar 10y ago
  From the fact that tar is a tape archiver, and according to the UNIX philosophy of "do one thing and do it well" it should empathically not dub as a (de)compressor. GNU implements tools inside of other tools. Emacs is a perfect example if that.
  - qwertyuiop924 10y ago
    GNU didn't originate from a unix mindset. You should know this. That doesn't mean their software is bad. Also, Emacs is incredibly useful, and one of the best general-purpose text editors out there.
    - Annatar 10y ago
      GNU didn't originate from a unix mindset. You should know this. I do and oh-how-right you are. What I have major difficulty with is comprehending why people like it, and why they tolerate Stallman's nonsense when there are alternatives. The "rip it all out because it's not ours and re-invent everything just because" attitude is so fundamentale broken.
      - qwertyuiop924 10y ago
        As somebody who does tolerate Stallman's nonsense, I can tell you why: It's because some of his software is really good. Like Emacs. I'm willing to bet that you're a VI user, but for us Emacs users, there really is no substitute. And if you want a Scheme package, Guile is a really good one (although it's not as efficient as some of the compiled schemes): Andy is doing a great job with it. There are other examples, like tar (I know you would disagree, but dammit, GNU tar is so useful). When there isn't, or Stallman deliberately cripples his software, there are usually alternatives (clang, etc.) which we use, unless "we" are FSF people. Which most of us aren't. Yes, his attitude is somewhat broken, although I understand why it exists. Also, he's not quite as NIH as you seem to think: There are several cases where he advocates use of software that isn't his own (heck, he advocates clang, or at least has no problem with it). Also, I have no objection to long options, or to utilities that are a little bit richer (just so long as they still interoperate, and you can still use the standard options, which is usually the case).
        Annatar 10y ago
        I'm willing to bet that you're a VI user, And you'd win that bet. Not even a vim user (except on Amiga), but straight vi. Why? Because vi was always there when I needed a text editor, and by learning vi, I automatically learned ed, sed, and ex. All of a sudden, I could write multi line sed programs.

by Annatar 10y ago

icebraining 10y ago

Is there any non-dead UNIX that doesn't, nowadays? The BSD tar also has -z, as does SmartOS. As much as I enjoy "cat -v considered harmful", it seems the battle is lost for UNIX itself. http://harmful.cat-v.org/cat-v/ http://harmful.cat-v.org/cat-v/

Annatar 10y ago
At least on FreeBSD, I'm on BSD (don't have to use GNU), and on illumos / SmartOS I'm on AT&T System V release 4.0. As long as those alternatives exist GNU holds no power over me and provides no value that I care about, or need. Both BSD and SmartOS are free software.

crististm 10y ago

Remove z option in tar? Where did that come from?

Annatar 10y ago
From the fact that tar is a tape archiver, and according to the UNIX philosophy of "do one thing and do it well" it should empathically not dub as a (de)compressor. GNU implements tools inside of other tools. Emacs is a perfect example if that.
- qwertyuiop924 10y ago
  GNU didn't originate from a unix mindset. You should know this. That doesn't mean their software is bad. Also, Emacs is incredibly useful, and one of the best general-purpose text editors out there.
  - Annatar 10y ago
    GNU didn't originate from a unix mindset. You should know this. I do and oh-how-right you are. What I have major difficulty with is comprehending why people like it, and why they tolerate Stallman's nonsense when there are alternatives. The "rip it all out because it's not ours and re-invent everything just because" attitude is so fundamentale broken.
    - qwertyuiop924 10y ago
      As somebody who does tolerate Stallman's nonsense, I can tell you why: It's because some of his software is really good. Like Emacs. I'm willing to bet that you're a VI user, but for us Emacs users, there really is no substitute. And if you want a Scheme package, Guile is a really good one (although it's not as efficient as some of the compiled schemes): Andy is doing a great job with it. There are other examples, like tar (I know you would disagree, but dammit, GNU tar is so useful). When there isn't, or Stallman deliberately cripples his software, there are usually alternatives (clang, etc.) which we use, unless "we" are FSF people. Which most of us aren't. Yes, his attitude is somewhat broken, although I understand why it exists. Also, he's not quite as NIH as you seem to think: There are several cases where he advocates use of software that isn't his own (heck, he advocates clang, or at least has no problem with it). Also, I have no objection to long options, or to utilities that are a little bit richer (just so long as they still interoperate, and you can still use the standard options, which is usually the case).
      - Annatar 10y ago
        I'm willing to bet that you're a VI user, And you'd win that bet. Not even a vim user (except on Amiga), but straight vi. Why? Because vi was always there when I needed a text editor, and by learning vi, I automatically learned ed, sed, and ex. All of a sudden, I could write multi line sed programs.