| JupiterHost.Net 2006-01-19, 9:55 pm |
|
Grant Jacobs wrote:
>
> Forced to make time to get off this list as the volume is too much for
> the megre limit my ISP sets.
>
> Thanks again for those that helped; my working solution seems OK for now.
>
> Below is a reply to anonymous ("JupiterHost.Net"), anyone else is
> welcome to ignore it.
>
>
>
>
> Perhaps you missed the solution I posted, it was a rather long post. It
> uses a single line of shell code and a small, simple, perl module, a far
> cry from a new shell ;-)
>
> I've snipped most of your remarks as either you've missed my solution or
> you can't see that the assumptions you're making don't fit my situation.
> Important point is that I'm not not taking your advice because I've got
> an attitude or I think your "wrong", I'm not taking it because it
> doesn't fit my particular purpose. To repeat from my earlier post: I
> don't have a choice about using a mixture of shell and perl, its not
> something I can choose, even if I wanted to.
>
>
>
>
> I know you've accidentally left out some words, but perhaps its also
> your subconcious giving you some advice? ;-) For your sake I'll do the
> decent thing and *not* take your advice! :-) (Which I'm sure you'll be
> happy about.)
>
>
>
>
> Erm, 'history 1' seems to... what's missing? Its available in at least
> bash and tcsh, which is all I need to worry about for now. I don't mind
> if some obscure shells aren't supported. I'll check zsh sometime later,
> its important for my immediate use. 'sh' isn't relevant for me, FWIW,
> given tcsh and bash are common.
>
> (I know I also have to record the environment variables, but that's not
> hard in my case.)
>
>
>
>
> Sure, I agree. I'm happy to take anyone's advice and I do. But if the
> advice doesn't fit, the most sensible thing is not take it, right?
> There's nothing personal about that, so this sort of reply is a bit
> silly in that context.
>
> But just for fun, by analogy, your quote makes an assumption; it assumes
> the water isn't filthy, polluted and off-putting to the horse in which
> case you probably couldn't even lead a *sensible* horse to it :-) A
> smart horse might choose to be stubborn because it can see it doesn't
> make sense..
Cute, you're an idiot (sorry traffic was bad and I've still got some
road rage).
I know I said no more replies from me but I don't want silence to be
assumed that you made any sort of valid point.
*You* are the one who missed the point, and still are:
There are easier, better, more portable, (IE pronounced "with Perl or
*any* other language or system") etc etc ways to get the data you want
regardless of the project.
You just may need to rethink how you go about it.
The insults all started when you kept saying no one here understood what
you where saying, when they in fact did but where giving an answer you
still don't seem to comprehend and now I'm ending them with this message.
In other words a rube goldberg machine will work, and it can be fun to
fiddle with, but there are more practical ways to do it in general, but
still a rube goldberg isn't bad mind you just not as efficient or easy
to take around with you.
I'm very sorry I wasted time trying to help, and hope the best on your
project. and with that I'll make you deal:
I'll shut up if you do, agreed?
This is absolutley the last reply I'll make to this thread regardless of
how stubbornly clueless and unreasonable the reply is.
Tell you mom I said hi, she appreciates me :) (ok that was juvenial but
fun ;p)
|