Messages in this thread | | | From | (H. Peter Anvin) | Subject | Re: GNU/Linux stance by Richard Stallman | Date | 4 Apr 1999 23:10:57 GMT |
| |
Followup to: <19990404155740.A4657@hazel.buici.com> By author: Oscar Levi <elf@buici.com> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel > > Just did. A ok. > > %^) > > Who's to say what's in a binary executable? The overhead of > implementing a usage message is negligible. In fact, the only excuse > for *not* putting them into small binaries is...code size? > nope...complexity? nope...efficiency? nope...laziness? Bingo. > > Think again Mr T. >
It's BROKEN -- it breaks the semantics of true(1) and false(1), which among other things is that they ignore any arguments. Hence it is a BUG.
-hpa -- "The user's computer downloads the ActiveX code and simulates a 'Blue Screen' crash, a generally benign event most users are familiar with and that would not necessarily arouse suspicions." -- Security exploit description on http://www.zks.net/p3/how.asp
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |