# A Really Dumb Linux Question **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [April 21, 2002, 2:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-really-dumb-linux-question/104754 "2002-04-21T02:43:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Cheatem\_Undhow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/13edae/32.png) [@Dewey\_Cheatem\_Undhow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Cheatem_Undhow)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2002, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-really-dumb-linux-question/104754/41 "2002-04-23T23:02:13Z")
**Derleth** : Yes, I have a shell account. At least, I can connect via telnet (SSH) and monkey around on the command line. **Undead Dude, Joe Cool** : I figured I’d just change it from “\>\>” to “\>”, which as I understand it, will overwrite the file rather than appending to it. That way, I always have the results of the last crontab, without the file getting huge. ---
**Author:** ![Joe\_Cool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ecb155/32.png) [@Joe\_Cool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Joe_Cool)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2002, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-really-dumb-linux-question/104754/42 "2002-04-24T02:33:15Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Dewey Cheatem Undhow \* > \*\ ***Undead Dude, Joe Cool** : I figured I’d just change it from “\>\>” to “\>”, which as I understand it, will overwrite the file rather than appending to it. That way, I always have the results of the last crontab, without the file getting huge. \*\* that sounds like a good compromise. I’d recommend leaving off the 2\>&1 though, so that you still get e-mail when there’s an error. ---
**Author:** ![Giraffe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giraffe/32/129_2.png) [@Giraffe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giraffe)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2002, 5:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-really-dumb-linux-question/104754/43 "2002-04-24T05:34:54Z")
Actually, in at least csh and tcsh shells (maybe all of them, for all I know), “\>” means write to file, unless it exists. “\>\>” means append. If you want to overwrite the file, you need to use “\>!”. ---
**Author:** ![Popup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/94ad74/32.png) [@Popup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Popup)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2002, 7:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-really-dumb-linux-question/104754/44 "2002-04-24T07:10:54Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Giraffe \* > \*\*Actually, in at least csh and tcsh shells (maybe all of them, for all I know), “\>” means write to file, unless it exists. “\>\>” means append. If you want to overwrite the file, you need to use “\>!”. \*\* Well, it depends. Most shells (at least tcsh[sub](which we all know is the best)[/sub] and bash) will actually allow ‘\>’ to overwrite a file unless ‘noclobber’ is set. But in all systems I’ve seen it’s set by default. It’s never a bad idea to use ‘\>!’ if you’re sure that you want to overwrite. [sub]Emacs rules[/sub] ---
**Author:** ![OpalCat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/8edcca/32.png) [@OpalCat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OpalCat)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2002, 12:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-really-dumb-linux-question/104754/45 "2002-04-24T12:14:38Z")
Eh, zsh is better 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Undead\_Dude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/e19adc/32.png) [@Undead\_Dude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Undead_Dude)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2002, 12:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-really-dumb-linux-question/104754/46 "2002-04-24T12:16:42Z")
DOH! s/ **OpalCat** / **Undead Dude** / ---
**Author:** ![Popup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/94ad74/32.png) [@Popup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Popup)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2002, 2:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-really-dumb-linux-question/104754/47 "2002-04-24T14:39:58Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Undead Dude_ > \*\*Eh, zsh is better 🙂 \*\* Maybe, but where do you find **that** installed by default? Better get used to sh. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2002, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-really-dumb-linux-question/104754/48 "2002-04-24T20:08:34Z")
> [@](#): > > Well then **Chronos** , you’ve never seen a standard install of Solaris, FreeBSD, BSDi, IRIX, et. al. I’ve worked with a few Solaris and FreeBSD systems, and didn’t have root access… But in every case, the fellow who _did_ have root access had already installed pico. Besides, even without root access, I’m pretty sure that pico would be small enough to fit into a reasonably-sized home directory. Yes, I know that vi is even smaller. ---
**Author:** ![Undead\_Dude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/e19adc/32.png) [@Undead\_Dude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Undead_Dude)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2002, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-really-dumb-linux-question/104754/49 "2002-04-24T21:10:07Z")
**Popup** , very nice indeed. 🙂 But of course I do know sh very well also. I probably know it better than zsh, since there is less to know. 🙂 For every day use, I’m pretty comfortable with any shell that has an arrow-key based history. Because of the limitations of what is installed where, I pretty regularly use csh, bash and tcsh interactively, and sh for scripting. At least _one_ of those is bound to be on just about any system. Zsh just has a few extra bells/whistles, plus, when I am switching back and forth between different shells because of limitations on _other_ systems, zsh is very forgiving when I get back to **my** systems. If I throw tcsh syntax at it, it doesn’t complain. If I throw bash syntax at it doesn’t complain. And **Chronos** , that might often be true for hobbyists and “ma and pa” situations, but when “that fellow” has set up a farm of 20+ Solaris/FreeBSD servers, you’ll probably find that case to evaporate. 🙂 My experience is that it is very likely to be on a workstation (esp if someone there likes pine, of course), but on dedicated servers, you usually have what came on the CD plus the needed service apps, not much more. And of course pico doesn’t tend to come on the non-Linux CDs. And if today you need to work on [web005.north.somecompany.net](http://web005.north.somecompany.net) and tomorrow you need to work on [web014.north.somecompany.net](http://web014.north.somecompany.net), carrying your own tent with you starts to get a little tiring. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-really-dumb-linux-question/104754.md?page=2)