mailx anyone?

[Mayuresh Kathe]

does anyone on this list still use mailx?
if not regularly, at-least intermittently?

[Matthew Seaman]

Post by Mayuresh Kathe
does anyone on this list still use mailx?
if not regularly, at-least intermittently?

Given that mail(1) is part of the FreeBSD base system and is pretty much
the same thing as mailx(1), then probably not that many will use
mailx(1). mail(1) is something I do use intermittently.

Cheers,

Matthew

[Mayuresh Kathe]

Post by Matthew Seaman

Post by Mayuresh Kathe
does anyone on this list still use mailx?
if not regularly, at-least intermittently?

Given that mail(1) is part of the FreeBSD base system and is pretty
much the same thing as mailx(1), then probably not that many will use
mailx(1). mail(1) is something I do use intermittently.

mailx is just a link to mail. :-)

[Polytropon]

Post by Mayuresh Kathe

Post by Matthew Seaman

Post by Mayuresh Kathe
does anyone on this list still use mailx?
if not regularly, at-least intermittently?

Given that mail(1) is part of the FreeBSD base system and is pretty
much the same thing as mailx(1), then probably not that many will use
mailx(1). mail(1) is something I do use intermittently.

mailx is just a link to mail. :-)

It is actually the same file; check with "ls -li". :-)

[Lowell Gilbert]

Post by Polytropon

Post by Mayuresh Kathe

Post by Matthew Seaman

Post by Mayuresh Kathe
does anyone on this list still use mailx?
if not regularly, at-least intermittently?

Given that mail(1) is part of the FreeBSD base system and is pretty
much the same thing as mailx(1), then probably not that many will use
mailx(1). mail(1) is something I do use intermittently.

mailx is just a link to mail. :-)

It is actually the same file; check with "ls -li". :-)

Which doesn't mean it has the same behaviour if called by different names.
[See: 'w' vs. 'uptime']

In this case, though, I thought they were supposed to behave the same
way in either case, and I can't find any reason to think otherwise.

[Ralf Mardorf via freebsd-questions]

Post by Lowell Gilbert

Post by Polytropon
It is actually the same file; check with "ls -li". :-)

Which doesn't mean it has the same behaviour if called by different names.

#!/bin/dash
case $(basename $0) in
foo) printf "foo\n";;
bar) printf "bar\n";;
esac
exit

[Polytropon]

Post by Lowell Gilbert

Post by Polytropon

Post by Mayuresh Kathe

Post by Matthew Seaman

Post by Mayuresh Kathe
does anyone on this list still use mailx?
if not regularly, at-least intermittently?

Given that mail(1) is part of the FreeBSD base system and is pretty
much the same thing as mailx(1), then probably not that many will use
mailx(1). mail(1) is something I do use intermittently.

mailx is just a link to mail. :-)

It is actually the same file; check with "ls -li". :-)

Which doesn't mean it has the same behaviour if called by different names.
[See: 'w' vs. 'uptime']

Fully correct. On historical FreeBSD, there was a directory
full of programs (almost) all the same size, (almost) all with
different names, (almost) all pointing to the same inode entry;
that was /rescue/*. Depending on argv[0], the same (!) program
would act totally differently.

It is not uncommon on UNIX system to "select" program functionality
by program _invocation_, either via hardlink or via symlink. In
some cases, it's just different names for the same program with
the same behaviour, for providing backward compatibility, mostly
for scripts.

Post by Lowell Gilbert
In this case, though, I thought they were supposed to behave the same
way in either case, and I can't find any reason to think otherwise.

According to "man mail", there is no difference in behaviour
listed.

[RW via freebsd-questions]

On Wed, 13 Jun 2018 23:13:13 +0530

Post by Mayuresh Kathe

Post by Matthew Seaman

Post by Mayuresh Kathe
does anyone on this list still use mailx?
if not regularly, at-least intermittently?

Given that mail(1) is part of the FreeBSD base system and is pretty
much the same thing as mailx(1), then probably not that many will
use mailx(1). mail(1) is something I do use intermittently.

mailx is just a link to mail. :-)

I've no idea about mail and mailx, but in general being implemented in
the same executable doesn't imply the same behaviour.

For example less and more are hard-linked, but the shared binary behaves
differently according to how it's invoked.

[Steve O'Hara-Smith]

On Thu, 14 Jun 2018 04:43:19 +0100

Post by RW via freebsd-questions
For example less and more are hard-linked, but the shared binary behaves
differently according to how it's invoked.

For a better example look in /rescue, everything in there is the
same file.