On Thu, 20 Feb 2003 11:17:57 -0400, Julio Porras
<Julio.Porras AT VENALUM.COM DOT VE> wrote:

>I really HATE this kind of responses, I really do.
Thanks for sharing that.

>Davina wrote: "csh for scripting eh? Try digging around on the net for the
>document containing numerous reasons not to!  :-)"
>
>This not only provides us with little help, but also, it trend to insult our
>"small" intelligence (after all, we post to this list looking for help,
>right?).
>
>You mean "we are doing something wrong" ?
>You mean "we are stupid NOT TO KNOW why we are doing it the wrong way" ?
>You mean "you are very smart because you DO know the base of our problem and
>you are NOT willing to tell us" ?

It was a tongue in cheek comment, as a footnote to a focussed and helpful
piece of advice. It was followed by a smiley, and that ALWAYS makes
everything all right. It was not addressed to you, but to Allan who supplied
the scriptette. Further explanation was beyond the scope of this list, but
the document is well worth reading, thanks to Mick for posting the URL.

To you Julio I make no apologies, you don't have to read my postings,
although on balance I think you will find that the vast majority of them are
straightforward and helpful.

To Allan, I am sorry if I offended, but I never meant any offence or insult,
and as you pointed out, the script would also have worked in sh, or ksh.
Don't let my insensitivity put you off posting further gems.

Going back on topic, has anyone taken the trouble to write a script to
interrogate the clients directly and bring the server up to date with
version and platform information? This might be quite useful.

--
Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via email
to listserv AT listmail.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
http://listmail.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can
also view and post messages to the list.
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=