Paul Richards wrote:
> Mark Ovens wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 09, 2000 at 02:33:44PM -0400, Will Andrews wrote:
> > > On Wed, Aug 09, 2000 at 12:59:29AM +0100, Mark Ovens wrote:
> > > > Is there any reason why this is unacceptable and could not be committed?
> > >
> > > Because it can be done with
Mark Ovens wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 09, 2000 at 02:33:44PM -0400, Will Andrews wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 09, 2000 at 12:59:29AM +0100, Mark Ovens wrote:
> > > Is there any reason why this is unacceptable and could not be committed?
> >
> > Because it can be done with an awk/sed script?
> >
>
> I'll f
On Wed, Aug 09, 2000 at 02:33:44PM -0400, Will Andrews wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 09, 2000 at 12:59:29AM +0100, Mark Ovens wrote:
> > Is there any reason why this is unacceptable and could not be committed?
>
> Because it can be done with an awk/sed script?
>
I'll forget about it then. I only did it
On Wed, Aug 09, 2000 at 12:59:29AM +0100, Mark Ovens wrote:
> Is there any reason why this is unacceptable and could not be committed?
Because it can be done with an awk/sed script?
--
Will Andrews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GCS/E/S @d- s+:+ a--- C++ UB$ P+ L- E--- W+ N-- !o ?K
On Wednesday, August 09, 2000, Mark Ovens wrote:
> The only thing I couldn't work out is why sysctl() adds 5 spaces after
> the date sub-string, so I've haven't stripped them out (hence the
> indented third line).
sysctl() does not do that, that's what the data in the kernel
is. Look at src/s
The output of ``uname -a'' appears in hundreds of e-mails and PRs yet
the output format is not ideal for this (especially e-mail in
80-column mail readers) as it is a single line.
Attached is a patch for an enhancement I've made that adds a new
option ``-A'' (rather than change ``-a'') that split
