| 1 |
I've always thought it was something like data/disk duplication |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016, 22:46 <Meino.Cramer@×××.de> wrote: |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
> Neil Bothwick <neil@××××××××××.uk> [16-03-31 04:04]: |
| 6 |
> > On Wed, 30 Mar 2016 19:35:33 +0200, Meino.Cramer@×××.de wrote: |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> > > By the way: For what stands the 'dd' for ? |
| 9 |
> > > (Think unix!) |
| 10 |
> > |
| 11 |
> > The apocryphal story is that it is copy and convert, but cc was already |
| 12 |
> > taken by the C compiler. |
| 13 |
> > |
| 14 |
> > If you have ever mistyped the of argument, you'll understand why some say |
| 15 |
> > it stands for delete and destroy ;-) |
| 16 |
> > |
| 17 |
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dd_(Unix) is quite useful. |
| 18 |
> > |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> I had to ask for that.... :) |
| 21 |
> I know that story from the "The heritage UNIX society" (THUS ) and |
| 22 |
> I found that SO unixy...it put a BIG smile on my face. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> But "delete and destroy" is also VERY descriptive... ! ::::))))) |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> > |
| 29 |
> > -- |
| 30 |
> > Neil Bothwick |
| 31 |
> > |
| 32 |
> > Top Oxymorons Number 11: Terribly pleased |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> |
Archives