3 ms·
Because it's useless extra typing. People try to narrow commands down to two fucking chars and you suggest to type the whole goddamn path!
by mathfailure 8mo ago
Because it's useless extra typing. People try to narrow commands down to two fucking chars and you suggest to type the whole goddamn path!
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- Dylan16807 8mo agoNobody suggested typing whole paths.
- mathfailure 8mo agoThey did. Just not explicitly.
- Joker_vD 8mo agoI've asked you why prepending paths to PATH instead of appending was a bad idea. How is having typing full paths has anything to do with it?
- Dylan16807 8mo agoThe only situation where you'd need to type a full path is when you have a name collision. But the suggestion to not worry about collisions with unknown system binaries also said to put the script folder first. In that situation running the script doesn't need a full path, and you won't be running the unknown system binary. So you won't be typing full paths. Please explain the non-explicit suggestion you see, because I don't see it. It's clear that "adding your script directory in front of the PATH" means a one time edit to .bashrc or equivalent, right? In normal use you're not typing it.