From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,
	MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.2
Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [45.79.103.53])
	by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 1b10ff33
	for <ml@inbox.vuxu.org>;
	Thu, 19 Sep 2019 21:46:38 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112)
	id 98C439BC11; Fri, 20 Sep 2019 07:46:37 +1000 (AEST)
Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FBD19B906;
	Fri, 20 Sep 2019 07:46:20 +1000 (AEST)
Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112)
 id 656949B906; Fri, 20 Sep 2019 07:46:18 +1000 (AEST)
Received: from frieza.hoshinet.org (ks3374089.kimsufi.com [37.187.103.66])
 by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99C7B947D6
 for <tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org>; Fri, 20 Sep 2019 07:46:14 +1000 (AEST)
Received: by frieza.hoshinet.org (Postfix, from userid 1005)
 id 29B6E1C8C79B; Thu, 19 Sep 2019 17:46:13 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by frieza.hoshinet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F6C51C8C798;
 Thu, 19 Sep 2019 17:46:13 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 17:46:13 -0400 (EDT)
From: Steve Nickolas <usotsuki@buric.co>
X-X-Sender: nicci@frieza.hoshinet.org
To: Arthur Krewat <krewat@kilonet.net>
In-Reply-To: <19f9233f-6f54-46eb-116f-990660ca2a76@kilonet.net>
Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.02.1909191745270.12396@frieza.hoshinet.org>
References: <1568919029.18595.for-standards-violators@oclsc.org>
 <bf4a47b4-9f7a-2b0c-b6cd-56f42fd8a5dd@gmail.com>
 <20190919201833.GN2046@mcvoy.com>
 <19f9233f-6f54-46eb-116f-990660ca2a76@kilonet.net>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (BSF 1266 2009-07-14)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Subject: Re: [TUHS] [OT] Re: earliest Unix roff
X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
Precedence: list
List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list <tuhs.minnie.tuhs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/tuhs>,
 <mailto:tuhs-request@minnie.tuhs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/>
List-Post: <mailto:tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tuhs-request@minnie.tuhs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tuhs>,
 <mailto:tuhs-request@minnie.tuhs.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org
Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org
Sender: "TUHS" <tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org>

On Thu, 19 Sep 2019, Arthur Krewat wrote:

> Serious question:
>
> Which is better, creating a whole new binary to put in /usr/bin to do a 
> single task, or add a flag to cat?
>
> Which is better, a proliferation of binaries w/standalone source code, or a 
> single code tree that can handle slightly different tasks and save space?
>
> :)
>
> art k.

I would argue that the more "Unix" way to do it is have the multiple 
binaries.  One job, one tool, and chain them together to make bigger 
tools.

-uso.