Fri, 24 Feb 1995 13:16:21 +0100
|
On Fri, 24 Feb 1995 01:19:26 -0600 Winship <[log in to unmask]> said:
>Ok, I've been deliberately obtuse. I wanted a new option (maybe before
>"quiet," maybe between "quiet" and "set" maybe at the end of the
>command) regulating the output. The answer seems to be "no" so I'll
>forget it. For now.
Yes, I understood that. But I'm not going to implement an option whose
sole purpose is to make it possible to filter the regular output of a
command that under certain conditions may end up being quite large and
could fill up your mailbox. Getting back to your problem, which is to
issue the command without getting 3500 lines of output, I told you how
you can suppress the output. It's easy enough to send a second QUERY
command for just one subscriber to see whether the command has been
processed yet. These global SET aren't something you do every day either.
Eric
|
|
|