python 2.7.12 on Linux behaving differently than on Windows

Ben Bacarisse ben.usenet at
Wed Dec 7 18:25:38 EST 2016

BartC <bc at> writes:

> On 07/12/2016 15:25, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>> BartC <bc at> writes:
>> <snip>
>>> [...] But remember:
>>>   cp *.c
>>> There might be some irate users out there if it can't detect a simple
>>> user error like that.
>> There might be.  They are ill-served by current Unix shells.  But,
>> oddly, the flow has gone the other way.  People have wanted Unix shells
>> and utilities ported to Windows, not cmd.exe and friends ported to
>> Linux.  You clearly see a gap in the provision here.  Wouldn't it be
>> better for the world if you wrote cmd.exe for Linux rather than
>> complaining about what other shells do?
> It's not my job to write OSes.

A shell is not an OS.  The kind you want is not a big program and if you
are not alone (as I think you almost certainly are) in wanting it, you
will get help to make it happen.  Writing a simple shell used to be an
introductory exercise in system programming classes.

But maybe it's not really much of a problem for you are your main
concern is to have jolly good whinge about it?

> But you might have seen my objections; even putting aside bias in
> favour of one OS or another, I think many of them are valid. That fact
> Linux is getting more popular does not mean it is always better.)

It's not an OS issue -- Windows has bash and Linux does not have a
compatible cmd.exe only because no one seems to have considered it
enough of a problem to be worth solving.

But, yes, I've seen all these objections before.  The problem is not
their validity by the absence of a solution with which they can be
compared.  MS's cmd.exe is not the solution (for me).  I've never had a
problem from accidentally typing cp *.c but when I had to use Windows I
had a problem almost every day getting anything done.


More information about the Python-list mailing list