On 3/10/2012 1:10 PM, Lew wrote:
> Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> Lew wrote:
>>> Novice wrote:
>>>> Lew wrote:
>>>>> Novice wrote:
>>>>>> Arved Sandstrom wrote:
>>>>>>> Novice wrote:
>>>>>>> [ SNIP ]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It would be very helpful if someone could explain what would
>>>>>>>> happen in a real-world production situation where a long-running
>>>>>>>> batch program or a constantly-running online program started
>>>>>>>> writing error messages to the log. What will operators do to be
>>>>>>>> able to read the log? I'm guessing they force it to close early
>>>>>>>> and then start a new file or they have a tool that will read the
>>>>>>>> log file correctly even without the final</log> tag.
>>>>>
>>>>> As mentioned, "tail" or "tail -f".
>>>>>
>>>>> Or vi or emacs.
>>>>>
>>>>> Or "less".
>>>>>
>>>>> Or just about anything.
>>>>>
>>>> Okay. As I said, my Unix/Linux is pretty rusty.
>>>
>>> Wha...?
>>>
>>> These programs run on Windows, too.
>>>
>>> This is about OSes. Windows is like Linux in this regard.
>>
>> You can get them for Windows.
>>
>> But they are not that common on Windows.
>
> True, but irrelevant. The point is that they are just programs, and that
> the issue at hand is operating system behavior, not program behavior.
> What program is involved has no bearing - the ability to read from a
> file as it's being written is a function of the OS and file system,
> inherently so. It doesn't matter what program we cite. I mentioned that
> they run on Windows, too, to point out that the behavior is not inherent
> to the program. That point is unaffected by how common the program is.
> There are plenty of programs on Windows, too. If you don't like my
> example, please extend the reasoning on your own to apply to whatever
> program you do like as an example.

All very true.

But I think novice was just trying to say that he was rusty in *nix
including those tools.

And that is not particular surprising if he is a Windows user.

Arne