Re: [flalug] Re: 1st post

From: Khepri (khepri@perennialwisdom.com)
Date: Fri Feb 18 2005 - 17:18:02 EST


Eben King wrote:

>>Investigating it a bit it seems that the major
>>difference is perl scripts can be executable?
>
>
> Lost the thread. The difference between perl scripts and what?

PHP I think it was....

PHP cannot be compiled into an executable whereas
Perl can...I think that was what I was wondering?

> But anyway, in Un*x, any file can be executable.

!? ...:)

> It doesn't depend on the
> file's name as it does in some other OSes. Permissions are metadata, stored
> along with the file's name, dates, ownership, etc.
>
> If the user asks to run a particular file (usually by typing its name), it's
> up to the OS to figure out how to run it. It looks to see if the first two
> characters are "#!". If they are, the OS treats the rest on the line as an
> interpreter (so the file is a script -- perl, bash, expect, or
> what-have-you) and feeds the file to it.

Hmmm. Slightly confused now...:) A good thing.
This must be one of those grey areas....

So, is there any easy way to tell which files are
binary and which are ascii? I notice in this
microdistro tht the Perl scripts are listed as
executbles as indicated by their color (ansi I guess)

Chris



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 20:38:56 EDT