[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Looking for the mktemp(1) maintainer :)
It appears obvious why you wrote this new version.
You wanted to re-invent the wheel, making it slightly different, and
in those slight differences cause people interoperabilty problems. I
urge everyone out there to avoid using this version. Interoperability
and simplicity can co-exist, and it is perfectly clear to me at least
that multiple versions move against these two prime precepts.
I'd love to believe that there are other reasons for writing
incompatible software, besides the obvious fact that the result shown
below DOES HAVE INCOMPATIBLITIES. But I can't think of any.
And then some idiot will write code that depends on one of those
incompatibilities. And then it will break on all other versions. I
know! We should now add something that is incompatible with yours!
Oh this all makes the world so much better!
At least this time we know who to blame. Thanks for stepping
forward. Therefore, I post this for the archives.....
> For various reasons, I didn't care for the version that seems
> to have its origins in OpenBSD (if I am remembering correctly).
> Here is the (generated) man page for what I knocked together.
> I like it 'cuz it fills in defaults for you and lets you specify
> a suffix to the file name:
> The sources are available either as a massivly bloated GNU-ish
> distribution tarball, or a somewhat largish tarball that will
> bootstrap into bloat. :-)
> The real sources consist of four files:
> which still add up to 20K uncompressed. The rest of the src
> tarball is used to construct the full-blown distribution.
> Cheers, Bruce