Subject: Re: Why text=binary mounts
From: [email-masked] (Peter Dalgaard BSA)

16 Jan 1998 14:38:11 -0800
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
References: <[email-masked]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: "Gary R. Van Sickle" <[email-masked]>
Cc: "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>

"Gary R. Van Sickle" <[email-masked]> writes:

> Yeah, you don't have the GNU make utility (I'll be deep in the cold, cold 
> ground before I figure out how to use that one, and not for lack of 
> trying).  Yeah, you don't have EMACS (how do you open a file with it?). 
>  Yeah, no vi.
> 
> My point here is that it seems to me that MS/Borland have the distinct 
> usability advantage, and like it or not, we're all users.  So what is Unix' 
> advantage over MS when it comes to software development?  Is it simply that 
> the GNU stuff is available free?

For large projects, and especially when porting Unix programs(!), the
advantage it quite striking. It's very much one of these "XX can do it
easier IF it can do it"-situations. "Make" can be used for many
things, not just programs but also documentation, testing, etc.
The whole Unix approach is summarized as "Just Type Make", i.e.
automate as much as you can, even if costs a bit of head scratching,
you'll only need to do it once.

-- 
   O__  ---- Peter Dalgaard             Blegdamsvej 3  
  c/ /'_ --- Dept. of Biostatistics     2200 Cph. N   
 (*) \(*) -- University of Copenhagen   Denmark      Ph: (+45) 35327918
~~~~~~~~~~ - ([email-masked])             FAX: (+45) 35327907

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