Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #1486
| From | blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.os.linux.misc |
| Subject | Re: Why these program need './'? |
| Date | 2011-06-27 21:42 +0000 |
| Organization | None |
| Message-ID | <96sbqbF4fuU3@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | <9860fe23-204a-4c07-9d2e-e3479d096a3c@p13g2000yqh.googlegroups.com> <XI-dnQq7YuwsklDQnZ2dnUVZ8j2dnZ2d@lyse.net> <pan.2011.06.26.14.35.10@gmail.com> <slrnj0gknf.7ds.unruh@wormhole.physics.ubc.ca> |
In article <slrnj0gknf.7ds.unruh@wormhole.physics.ubc.ca>, unruh <unruh@wormhole.physics.ubc.ca> wrote: > On 2011-06-26, Todd Carnes <toddcarnes@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, 13 May 2011 13:02:52 +0200, David Brown wrote: > > > >> Typing "./" before programs in your current directory is hardly a > >> hardship - but if it is, put . in your $PATH if you want. It's /your/ > >> machine, and /your/ choice. > > > > It may not be a hardship, but it's certainly an annoyance. > > Why? You surely have your runnable programs in specific directories. JUt > put them into your path. Having runable probramms scattered all over > hell's half acre is even more of an annoyance. I guess if you don't do much code development that might be true, but, um, surely if you're writing code (including shell scripts), executing files in the current directory, or a nearby directory, is something you're going to do a lot? I don't mind including the "./", and in fact it avoids any possible ambiguity, but the idea that *all* executables live in directories in $PATH seems -- wrong. ? -- B. L. Massingill ObDisclaimer: I don't speak for my employers; they return the favor.
Back to comp.os.linux.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Why these program need './'? fl <rxjwg98@gmail.com> - 2011-05-12 19:56 -0700
Re: Why these program need './'? "Chris F.A. Johnson" <cfajohnson@gmail.com> - 2011-05-12 23:11 -0400
Re: Why these program need './'? Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2011-05-13 04:23 +0000
Re: Why these program need './'? gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2011-05-13 10:29 +0000
Re: Why these program need './'? David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2011-05-13 13:02 +0200
Re: Why these program need './'? Todd Carnes <toddcarnes@gmail.com> - 2011-06-26 14:35 +0000
Re: Why these program need './'? despen@verizon.net - 2011-06-26 19:10 -0400
Re: Why these program need './'? unruh <unruh@wormhole.physics.ubc.ca> - 2011-06-27 09:52 +0000
Re: Why these program need './'? blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2011-06-27 21:42 +0000
Re: Why these program need './'? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-06-27 22:59 +0100
Re: Why these program need './'? David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2011-06-28 08:46 +0200
Re: Why these program need './'? blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2011-06-28 15:50 +0000
Re: Why these program need './'? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2011-06-28 10:02 +0100
Re: Why these program need './'? Jean-David Beyer <jeandavid8@verizon.net> - 2011-06-28 09:00 -0400
Re: Why these program need './'? Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2011-06-28 14:21 +0000
Re: Why these program need './'? blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2011-06-28 15:51 +0000
Re: Why these program need './'? "Chris F.A. Johnson" <cfajohnson@gmail.com> - 2011-06-28 18:19 -0400
Re: Why these program need './'? blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2011-06-29 19:54 +0000
Re: Why these program need './'? Feranija <feranija@net...> - 2011-06-29 00:47 -0700
csiph-web