Re: [dev] Is there a reason to use install(1)?

From: Ethan Grammatikidis <>
Date: Sat, 29 May 2010 23:37:51 +0100

On 29 May 2010, at 23:29, Moritz Wilhelmy wrote:

>> You mean, install is just meant as a wrapper around the standard
>> tools
>> to express the actions in a more compact way. (btw: It's a shame that
>> install isn't a shell script then.)
> Well. why isn't man(1) a shell-script? And what about the dozens of
> other
> tools which could be trivially implemented in sh?
> some loop over the directories in $MANPATH to look for the manpage,
> nroff -man $f | $PAGER
> Even the BSDs have man as a binary program. I can't speak for
> solaris or
> anything else, but I guess they don't differ in that point either

It's a shell script on Plan 9, which surprised me, actually. 149 lines.

Also hi everyone. :) I joined the list because I thought rc-httpd
might go down well here (oh hey, more shell script), but I may well
use some of the tools on my PDA if I can beat gcc into submission
(it's misbehaving badly) or preferably use kencc to compile stuff for

Simplicity does not precede complexity, but follows it. -- Alan Perlis
Received on Sat May 29 2010 - 22:37:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Sat May 29 2010 - 22:48:02 UTC