orthanc at subdimension.com
Mon Apr 22 09:33:42 EDT 2002
You make a good point, I run without . in the path anyway to keep my home
machine consistant with the other systems I use. It is not exactly much
effort to type ./
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Hicks" <chicks at chicks.net>
To: <rc5 at lists.distributed.net>
Sent: Monday, April 22, 2002 1:41 AM
Subject: RE: [RC5] Linux
> On Sat, 20 Apr 2002, Paul West wrote:
> > Sure there is.
> > Don't learn bad habits.
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Orthanc [mailto:orthanc at subdimension.com]
> > Sent: Saturday, April 20, 2002 6:39 PM
> > Subject: Re: [RC5] Linux
> > Probably worth pointing out that if you only have one User (eg a home
> > machine) there is no reason not to put . in your path.
> You never untar anything somebody sends you then change into that
> directory and type ls?* The dangers of . in PATH exist for anyone.
> * Yes, I know . wouldn't have to the first thing in the PATH, but you get
> the idea.
> "Outside of a dog, a man's best friend is a good book.
> Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read." - Groucho Marx
> To unsubscribe, send 'unsubscribe rc5' to majordomo at lists.distributed.net
> rc5-digest subscribers replace rc5 with rc5-digest
To unsubscribe, send 'unsubscribe rc5' to majordomo at lists.distributed.net
rc5-digest subscribers replace rc5 with rc5-digest
More information about the rc5