From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 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 24fb5d35 for ; Sat, 4 Jan 2020 21:02:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 1E988951C0; Sun, 5 Jan 2020 07:02:42 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 784BC9516C; Sun, 5 Jan 2020 07:02:17 +1000 (AEST) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 002D59516B; Sun, 5 Jan 2020 07:02:14 +1000 (AEST) Received: from viclamta39p.bpe.bigpond.com (viclamta39p.bpe.bigpond.com [203.38.21.103]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 121E095165 for ; Sun, 5 Jan 2020 07:02:13 +1000 (AEST) Received: from smtp.telstra.com ([10.10.26.4]) by viclafep39p-svc.bpe.nexus.telstra.com.au with ESMTP id <20200104210211.DPUC5813.viclafep39p-svc.bpe.nexus.telstra.com.au@smtp.telstra.com> for ; Sun, 5 Jan 2020 08:02:11 +1100 X-RG-Spam: Unknown X-RazorGate-Vade: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedufedrvdeghedgudegiecutefuodetggdotefrodftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfupfevtfgpvffgnffuvffttedpqfgfvfenuceurghilhhouhhtmecugedttdenucenucfjughrpeffhffvufgjkfhffgggtgesthdttddttdervdenucfhrhhomhepffgrvhgvucfjohhrshhfrghllhcuoegurghvvgeshhhorhhsfhgrlhhlrdhorhhgqeenucfkphepuddutddrudeguddrudelfedrvdeffeenucfrrghrrghmpehhvghloheprghnvghurhhinhdrhhhorhhsfhgrlhhlrdhorhhgpdhinhgvthepuddutddrudeguddrudelfedrvdeffedpmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpeeouggrvhgvsehhohhrshhfrghllhdrohhrgheqpdhrtghpthhtohepoehtuhhhshesthhuhhhsrdhorhhgqeenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedt X-RazorGate-Vade-Verdict: clean 0 X-RazorGate-Vade-Classification: clean X-RG-VS-CLASS: clean Received: from aneurin.horsfall.org (110.141.193.233) by smtp.telstra.com (5.8.418) id 5DF6FFEC031FA261 for tuhs@tuhs.org; Sun, 5 Jan 2020 08:02:11 +1100 Received: from aneurin.horsfall.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by aneurin.horsfall.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 004L2AHg063190 for ; Sun, 5 Jan 2020 08:02:10 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from dave@horsfall.org) Received: from localhost (dave@localhost) by aneurin.horsfall.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) with ESMTP id 004L29cU063187 for ; Sun, 5 Jan 2020 08:02:10 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from dave@horsfall.org) X-Authentication-Warning: aneurin.horsfall.org: dave owned process doing -bs Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2020 08:02:08 +1100 (EST) From: Dave Horsfall To: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society In-Reply-To: <1ingL0-5g6-00@marmaro.de> Message-ID: References: <202001040258.0042wuic1359237@mail.cs.dartmouth.edu> <1ingL0-5g6-00@marmaro.de> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21.9999 (BSF 287 2018-06-16) X-GPG-Public-Key: http://www.horsfall.org/gpgkey.pub X-GPG-Fingerprint: 05B4 FFBC 0218 B438 66E0 587B EF46 7357 EF5E F58B X-Home-Page: http://www.horsfall.org/ X-Witty-Saying: "chmod 666 the_mode_of_the_beast" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Subject: Re: [TUHS] sh: cmd | >file X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" On Sat, 4 Jan 2020, markus schnalke wrote: > My question was not about the use cases for ``>file'' but *why* it was > made a simple command. Let me explain: > > One creates an empty file or truncates a file with: > > >file > > why not with: > > :>file > ? > > To me it looks to be the more sensible ... more regular way. The Unix philosophy, perhaps i.e. keep it simple? Why have ":" (an actual internal Shell command) when "" (the null command) will do the job? I guess only the Bell Labs bods here can answer this. -- Dave