🚀 go-pugleaf

From: Steve Hayman <sahayman@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu>


I do remember the reasons why "yes" was renamed, and at one point
I agreed with them.  But really, all the change is trying to do
is protect the handful of people who might ever type "yes"
on a hardcopy terminal.  Those people - operators, whoever - ought
to make their own alias or use a PATH that picks up a "fixed" version
of yes.  

> Perhaps a better change would have been to make "yes"
> not work if output is to a tty?

There might still be reasons to make "yes" work when output is
to a tty.  maybe I'm testing something and need a stream of
output to the screen.  Who's to say?  I think it would be better
to leave the stock /usr/ucb/yes alone.  Some people might like it the
way it is.