Subject: Re: using cat on binary files (CTRL-Z trauma)
From: [email-masked] (Jim Balter)

29 Oct 1996 22:56:32 -0800
Sender: [email-masked]
Approved: [email-masked]
Distribution: cygnus
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Original-To: [email-masked] (DJ Delorie)
Original-Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
In-Reply-To: <[email-masked]> from "DJ Delorie" at Oct 29, 96 09:20:25 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
Content-Length: 1241      
Original-Sender: [email-masked]

DJ Delorie wrote:
> 
> 
> > Maybe we can file a class action suit for a few billion against the
> > turkey who unleashed on the world a system with such fundamentally
> > bad design decisions as a two-character EOL indicator and an in-band
> > EOF indicator.
> 
> It was a good design.  It's an old design.  If you want to toast
> someone, toast the idiots that chose to *keep* the design past its
> useful life.
> 
> If you want to know why CRLF is the standard, try this command on a unix
> box:
> 
> 	stty -onlcr -icrnl
> 
> Note that MS-DOS does not have, nor has ever needed, an stty command.

Funny, but my unix system continues to run even when I delete this command
from the disk.  stty has nothing to do with how lines are stored in files.

> Nor does MS-DOS need the termios libraries.  Nor does it have a
> termcap.

Nor can you run edit on ADM, Beehive, and Wang terminals.

None of this has anything to do with how lines are stored in files.

> Neither DOS nor Unix are better than the other; each has its
> good points and bad points.  The DJGPP mailing list sees both sides;
> the dos folks switching to a unix compiler have a similar number of
> valid greivances about the "Unix way".

Non sequitur all the way.
-- 
<J Q B>

-
For help on using this list, send a message to
"[email-masked]" with one line of text: "help".