4 ms·
To the extent that "standard in the colloquial sense" even makes sense, it's still wrong because "head" (the proposed alternative) is no more common or well und
by notacoward 4y ago
To the extent that "standard in the colloquial sense" even makes sense, it's still wrong because "head" (the proposed alternative) is no more common or well understood than dd, and "pv" is far less so.
- version_five 4y agoThat probably depends on the user. I use head every day, I can't think of the last time I used dd. Agree with you on pv, I don't believe I've ever used it - I've seen it around occasionally but it's never top of mind the rare time I might want it
- dfc 4y agoUsing standard as an adjective to mean "used or accepted as normal or average" or "usual, common, or customary" makes a lot of sense. I just came back from touring my buddy's new woodshop. When people ask how it looks I will say "he has your standard set of woodshop tools." Nobody is going to wonder if it's an ISO, or ANSI standard set of woodshop tools.
- kelnos 4y agoIf we go by your definition, then 'dd' is absolutely "standard", and 'pv' absolutely is not.
- ufo 4y agoThe point here is that dd is the weird one out that has a different command line syntax than everything else. Not about whether it's installed by default. (Let's not get distracted by the pv bit; dd's status=progress isn't POSIX either)