'Linux'... First Introduction !! - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: GlennSprigg
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2019, 01:32:29 pm
content: I've been a 'DOS/Windows' man all my life! However, I've decided to be a bit more 'edurmecated'and so I'm playing around with 'Linux' as a Virtual-Machine first, within a Windows PC.Now obviously, GUI's make the learning relatively typical, (but different), than Windows or a Mac.However, most online 'tuition's' seem to start with the CLI (Command Line Interpreter), as so muchseems to be done with that, for most users, although it seems daunting at first. And that's OK.But why did they seemingly have to "re-invent the wheel" ? Basically, it's like going back to 'DOS',which I'm very familiar with, although I can understand that for a lot of young people today is foreign.OK, so why use a new command like 'ls' instead of 'dir' which is world known for a Directory listing?Or, using 'cp' instead of the universally understood 'copy' as in DOS ? Andnumerousmore changes.I don't understand why they didn't standardize the names, even though it is a different O.S.

author: hazeanderson
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: December 17, 2019, 01:41:37 pm
content: DOS is a watered-down version of UNIX. Linux is a proper UNIX implementation. Linux may have come after DOS, but UNIX was first. DOS is the "wheel reinventer" here.So things like ls, cp, mv and xargs (good luck doing that on DOS) were first.Learning the cli in UNIX (Linux) is pure power. I recommend it.

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2019, 01:48:11 pm
content: If you haven't noticed, the Powershell in Windows supports many common Linux commands. And Windows 10 has WSL...

author: GlennSprigg
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2019, 02:07:38 pm
content: Quote from: hazeanderson on December 17, 2019, 01:41:37 pmFIRSTLY, congratulations on your very first Post/Comment !! And thanksYea, but I keep seeing on 'YouTube' that the first thing to learn is that 'Linux' is not 'Unix'Obviously though, at some original point, their boundaries cross !!

author: hazeanderson
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: December 17, 2019, 02:24:40 pm
content: Thank you. I first learned UNIX and Linux back in 1996, when I was studying Computer Science. Wikipedia is actually decent for learning the history of topics such as this:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_LinuxFor all in tents, and porpoises ... Linux is UNIX.

author: gnif
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 17, 2019, 02:46:06 pm
content: DOS is a toy compared to the Unix terminal. Congratulations on the leap to Linux, while the learning may be slow at first, once you get comfortable with the shell you will start to love it more and more each day. I use a GUI for my web browser, and photo editing... outside of that, I never work outside of a terminal.

author: eugenenine
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2019, 02:46:48 pm
content: Quote from: GlennSprigg on December 17, 2019, 01:32:29 pmYou have it backwards though. Linux is an open source clone of unix and unix came before DOS. Dos is what re-invented the wheel and only implemented a subset of familiar unix commands.If you check an ascii chart you'll notice that dos/microsoft re-arranged a few characters as well and our current keyboard config isn't quite as standard as it should have been.There have been several packages that could add the missing commands/windows to dos over the years.I have often found myself typing ls or cp or passwd or ifconfig (or even show running-config) or shift 2 to get " over the years. I made the linux switch around 2002-2003 when windowsXP was a big let down after windows 2000

author: gnif
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 17, 2019, 02:50:13 pm
content: Quote from: GlennSprigg on December 17, 2019, 01:32:29 pmJust to answer these, `ls` is short for `list`, while you say `dir` might be a more correct name for this command, it's actually not, as `dir` implies directories, not files.`cp` is just `copy`, but shorter. When you type commands for a living, removing those extra characters for very very common commands is a real time saver, such as `rm` for remove.The shell is so powerful, proper input/output redirection, pipes, fifos, remote low latency low bandwidth consoles via ssh, etc... I even write software in `vim`, a command line editor with full syntax highlighting that I can use from anywhere in the world remotely on a slow dial-up connection. I even write and cross compile applications for Windows on Linux in a Linux shell. Really, the command line is king, and it's why the tutorials all start there.

author: bitwelder
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2019, 03:28:59 pm
content: On the why Linux has so many short commands... because it derives from Unix and in the old times the typical Unix input device was a teletype, which had keys hard to press, so less keys pressed for each command were a good thing!

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2019, 03:29:25 pm
content: As said above, you have it completely backwards. The CLI and the typical Unix-like commands existed way before DOS, and will continue to exist way after Windows ceases to be an OS IMO.

author: hazeanderson
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: December 17, 2019, 04:44:26 pm
content: For what it is worth I am currently learning Electrical Engineering and one of my main sources is the ubiquitous Art of Electronics. If I could recommend a comparable book for learning *NIX it would be "Advanced Programming in the UNIX Environment" (APUE) by the late and great W. Richard Stevens. I even recommend sticking with the 1st edition from 1992 simply because it was a MAGICAL time for this stuff.http://www.kohala.com/start/apue.html(You can get a used hardback copy for under $10!)And just like AoE, this book is not designed to be "easy to comprehend" -- conversely, just like AoE, everything in the book is spot on, well covered and everything you need to start your experiments with. If you can make it through this book you will understand: file systems, managing user accounts, managing processes, signal handling, everything about I/O, IPC, and terminals. And at the end you will have inadvertently become an expert C programmer.This is a serious book for those who are serious about learning this stuff.

author: T3sl4co1l
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2019, 05:55:22 pm
content: Point of trivia, "dir" works in cygwin. This is an open source Linux-compatible environment (I suppose the aforementioned WSL serves much the same purpose in W10).Tim

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 17, 2019, 06:25:16 pm
content: I also suspect there is an amount of snobbery wit the developers about not having graphical settings. The settings in the GUI have increased but it would seem that to use linux to the full you need to commit a load of stuff to memory which is perhaps why windows drew ahead as it always strived to be idiot proof.

author: ebclr
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2019, 07:06:25 pm
content: You don't need a virtual machine, just install Microsoft free windows subsystem for Linux, and you have a ready Linux very easy, just type bash on the command com and you are there

author: eugenenine
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2019, 12:27:26 am
content: Quote from: Simon on December 17, 2019, 06:25:16 pmYou can do pretty much anything in the GUI in a modern Linux DE, its just faster to do things on the command line, as well as easier to repeat things or automate things.

author: rx8pilot
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2019, 01:25:40 am
content: This is a fun thread.I grew up in the pre-DOS era so I have experienced quite a few OS's over the decades. Because of the work I do, my professional experience has been dominated by MACOS and WINDOWS where I have been forced to learn and function at fairly low levels - lots of command line.Until recently, I had little need for Linux. That changed dramatically with my latest endeavors in industrial automation. All of a sudden, I find myself playing ultra-rapid-catch-up in Linux :-)I knew the learning curve would be something like drinking from a fire hose, but so far I LOVE LINUX. I love it at the low gritty levels running headless SBC's all the way to the consumer oriented Linux Mint. Translating my DOS and Windows skills is a major punch in the gut, but I believe it is worth it.The most fun so far are my growing Pi based projects that definitely put Linux front and center. I have converted a lot of older PC hardware to Linux machines that breathed all sorts of new life into them. Those exercises forced me to learn a lot about industrial level file sharing and networking. Fun stuff. Windows ALWAYS needs heavy hardware. Linux can run on nearly anything and do it well.

author: Nusa
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2019, 01:33:00 am
content: Quote from: T3sl4co1l on December 17, 2019, 05:55:22 pmTrue, but it's just an alternate name copy of "ls". None of the windows / options work with it, but all of the ls - or -- options do.

author: Leiothrix
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2019, 02:40:59 am
content: Quote from: Nusa on December 18, 2019, 01:33:00 amOn the other hand "ls" works just fine from powershell. It is an alias of Get-ChildItem, so none of the standard Windows or Linux options work with it.

author: hazeanderson
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: December 18, 2019, 04:33:13 am
content: consider this bare bones C implementation of ls#include <sys/types.h>#include <dirent.h>#include "ourhdr.h"intmain(int argc, char *argv[]){DIR *dp;struct dirent *dirp;if (argc != 2)err_quit("a single argument (the directory name) is required");if ( (dp = opendir(argv)) == NULL)err_sys("can't open %s", argv);while ( (dirp = readdir(dp)) != NULL)printf("%s\n", dirp->d_name);closedir(dp);exit(0);}

author: bsfeechannel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2019, 04:37:10 am
content: $ whereis dirdir: /bin/dir /usr/share/man/man1/dir.1.gz /usr/share/info/dir.old /usr/share/info/dir$ mkdir somedir$ cd somedir$ touch file1 file2 file3$ dirfile1 file2 file3$ lsfile1 file2 file3

author: BravoV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2019, 04:49:05 am
content: Quote from: GlennSprigg on December 17, 2019, 01:32:29 pmYou have to set your knowledge of history right, Unix was invented and released at early 70s, while DOS was introduced in 1981, almost 2 decades later.Hence the command "ls" as in "list" is older than the "dir" and others that you're familiar with, not the other way around you're believing.Regarding shorten word command, why not use complete word of "directory" instead of "dir", its much more human readable right ?I bet you will agree based on your own argument.

author: T3sl4co1l
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2019, 06:11:15 am
content: DOS came from a CP/M background, which in turn came from a Digital Research background (e.g. on the PDP machines).Microsoft also dabbled in *nix at the time (Xenix) so adopted some conventions but didn't take the full stack. Hence(?) the more limited form of shell syntax (limited piping) and commands (MOREisless, but, well, less). Probably partly by necessity, as DOS ran on much more limited systems, too (8086, no MMU, some down to 64k RAM).Tim

author: Jeroen3
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2019, 07:08:39 am
content: ls, mv, cp, cd, du are nice and short for commands you will be typinga lot.You can get all up your high horse on how correct they are in DOS or not, they are not as short.

author: blacksheeplogic
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2019, 07:10:16 am
content: Quote from: BravoV on December 18, 2019, 04:49:05 amOperating systems are complexComputers need an operating systemDOS is an operating systemTherefore computers were invented to run DOSBut, I think it could also be reasoned from the OP's point of view:I only know DOS, therefore DOS.Either way, the moon landings never happened.

author: blacksheeplogic
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2019, 07:14:52 am
content: Quote from: Jeroen3 on December 18, 2019, 07:08:39 amOn Data Generals AOS/VS, only the beginning unique characters were require so f (filestatus) and that's even shorter than ls.

author: andersm
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2019, 07:41:24 am
content: Quote from: T3sl4co1l on December 18, 2019, 06:11:15 am"more"is the original command,lesscame later. (A quick google says that MORE was first included in MS-DOS 2.0, released in 1983, the same year less was developed.)

author: blacksheeplogic
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2019, 07:45:36 am
content: Quote from: andersm on December 18, 2019, 07:41:24 amI'm pretty sure pg predates more.

author: brucehoult
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2019, 09:36:39 am
content: Quote from: blacksheeplogic on December 18, 2019, 07:14:52 amDon't forget "speed", the teco work-alike was was even *more* restricted and more cryptic. I actually managed to do useful things with it.

author: PA0PBZ
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2019, 10:39:08 am
content: Quote from: BravoV on December 18, 2019, 04:49:05 amShow me your Calendar

author: andersm
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2019, 01:24:13 pm
content: Quote from: blacksheeplogic on December 18, 2019, 07:45:36 amSure, but it's neither more nor less.

author: bsfeechannel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2019, 03:12:23 am
content: Quote from: GlennSprigg on December 17, 2019, 01:32:29 pmWait until you discover that there is noren. Or that you can't quitvi.

author: blacksheeplogic
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2019, 03:54:42 am
content: Quote from: bsfeechannel on December 19, 2019, 03:12:23 amI don't understand why anyone struggles with vi, It's those other editors that use obtuse and non-intuitive commands.

author: CatalinaWOW
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2019, 04:49:27 am
content: I will bow to the wisdom of those who are programmers and systems administrators and use this stuff everyday. But GUIs took over from CLIs in most places. How can this be when the CLI is so superior? Well it is because all of those short commands and shortcuts have to be memorized to be efficient. And if you don't do it everyday you forget. And then you are searching help and FAQs and all that to get the job done and it is far less efficient.The doctors and lawyers and yes the electrical engineers who use these computers as a tool to do their real job value the crutch that is a GUI. And snicker at the snobbery of those who recommend the CLI for everyone.That is not to say that there aren't uses for everyone in the CLI. But it is hard to put to work on an occasional basis. The person who does a good GUI version of grep will be very popular. All the versions I have seen quickly lose generality in order to be "easier to use". Which strikes me as bad UI design rather than too much complexity, but then I haven't been able to come up with that magic version either.

author: Whales
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2019, 04:51:43 am
content: N.B. you can use dir instead of ls if it's your preferred muscle memory:Code:alias dir=lsTyping this in will only temporarily make it an alias (until you close the shell or logout). Add it to your login scripts (either .bashrc or .profile depending on your setup; think of them like user-specific AUTOEXEC.BAT) and it will become a default.Make your computer your own and tell everyone else to stuff it!You should have seen my old windows installs. It's a shame bb4win no longer works properly (Win10).

author: Ed.Kloonk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2019, 04:58:28 am
content: Quote from: gnif on December 17, 2019, 02:50:13 pmAfter cp came scp and I don't even know what Microsoft forces their users to type for that one.. securecopy?But that would break the 8 char limit for filenames so they would prolly wanna chuck in some underscore luvliness. sec_copy? Perfect.Welcome to the Linux community, GlennSprigg.It's nice to hear a new user ask 'why is it done this way?' instead of the ranty 'Linux is dumb. It didn't do what I expected. Giving up.'

author: Ed.Kloonk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2019, 05:07:19 am
content: Quote from: CatalinaWOW on December 19, 2019, 04:49:27 amThe thing is.. as time goes on, the GUI changes and always changes when the user least needs it to. As gnif pointed out, the terminal is always there and works as expected and nobody would be so silly to mess around by daring to change it.

author: blacksheeplogic
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2019, 05:18:29 am
content: Quote from: CatalinaWOW on December 19, 2019, 04:49:27 amI don't think I've ever seen someone snicker because CLI was used instead of the GUI but I have seen the CLI users snicker at the GUI users. It's unprofessional and the few that do give the impression that it's a general user trait, reality though there are always a few aholes in every group.Quote from: CatalinaWOW on December 19, 2019, 04:49:27 am??I feel a lot of the CLI is better just comes down to it being easier to instruct on and it's also often more consistent. Run this command rather than:what GUI are you using, what version, do you have a icon that looks like a bird, yea, click the little arrow, what just came up etc... WTF did you just click on??? Ummmm, was OK the ONLY button.... No I did not tell you to click on that.... WTF are you talking about, you click the button not me, next time 'Warning' appears don't click the Freakin OK button unless I tell you too...

author: Jeroen3
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2019, 12:11:07 pm
content: CLI and GUI have different use cases.While the CLI can do anything, you also must remember everything and read manuals.A GUI often displays all available program paths, with it you can choose if what you want to do matches with what you read on the screen.You can explore a GUI. You can read a man. Not the other way.

author: hazeanderson
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: December 19, 2019, 02:46:11 pm
content: Quote from: blacksheeplogic on December 19, 2019, 03:54:42 amI believe it is because not all computer users have learned "proper" touch typing. (I myself took a whole year of typing class.)vimis designed for touch typists and the others are not.vimis also associative in that you can figure out commands on your own -- as if you are literally creating them on the spot -- once you understand the workflow. ce2/ anyone?

author: hazeanderson
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: December 19, 2019, 02:57:02 pm
content: Quote from: CatalinaWOW on December 19, 2019, 04:49:27 amgrepis intended for processing text and subsequently doing stuff with that text --within the contextthat grep is being used in (AKA a shell). Why would I want a GUI to run privileged commands and how would I tell it take action on the results?If Google Chrome wants to hog my MacBook Pro I will just pop on over to a shell and issue:ps aux | grep Chrome | perl -nle'/(\d+)/;print$1' | xargs -n1 kill -9I did not take the time to learn to be lawyer or a doctor but if I wanted to do as they did .... well ... let's keep things in proper perspective here please. GUIs are fine but the command line is never going to go away, no matter how many times it is "replaced."

author: Ed.Kloonk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2019, 03:25:01 pm
content: Quote from: hazeanderson on December 19, 2019, 02:57:02 pmLuke and Derek recently butted heads about grep..

author: hazeanderson
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: December 19, 2019, 03:45:11 pm
content: I can't take the video titles seriously enough to watch. The first one says I am George Castanza and shallow women are laughing at me.The second says I will be strong and bald if I stop usingcatandgrepand only useawk.I hope my point was not overlooked however. My point was that when you use something likegrepyou are generally not even in the realm of being in a GUI in the first place ... other than to draw the window for your shell.This is not about "my way is better than your way" ... there are always ways to reduce the amount of characters you type (a sport known asgolfingamongst hardcore hobbyist) ... the point is that the "UNIX shell way" allows you express yourself in a way that makes sense to you, or more importantly, your organization.

author: brucehoult
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2019, 03:55:53 pm
content: Quote from: hazeanderson on December 19, 2019, 02:57:02 pmTry...Code:pgrep ChromeWorks on both Mac and Linux.kill doesn't need the -n1 on xargs.Not to mention pkill, but I like to check the results first e.g. "pgrep Chrome | xargs ps"

author: gnif
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 19, 2019, 03:58:15 pm
content: Quote from: brucehoult on December 19, 2019, 03:55:53 pmOr, even easier:Code:pkill -9 chrome

author: brucehoult
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2019, 03:59:41 pm
content: You posted as I was editing my message to include pkill and explain it's maybe a little tooo dangerous

author: Ed.Kloonk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2019, 04:02:36 pm
content: $ kill_all_humans

author: brucehoult
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2019, 04:13:35 pm
content: Quote from: Ed.Kloonk on December 19, 2019, 04:02:36 pmAffirmative - I poked one, it was dead.

author: magic
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2019, 06:10:53 pm
content: Quote from: Ed.Kloonk on December 19, 2019, 05:07:19 amExcept for GNU and theirlsprinting "" around filenames which contain spacesAnd then of course people flood their mailing list calling them the worst names and they go like "look, we did nothing wrong, there was a beta release, you could have tested it and reported your concerns earlier"

author: Ed.Kloonk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2019, 09:56:53 pm
content: Quote from: magic on December 19, 2019, 06:10:53 pmRelease early and release often. For every one that bitches about what it doesn't do for them there are 9 more that are very happy they got in at the ground floor.

author: jmelson
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2019, 11:02:39 pm
content: Quote from: bsfeechannel on December 19, 2019, 03:12:23 am

author: hazeanderson
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: December 20, 2019, 12:52:10 am
content: Thanks for pointing outpgrep(and I agree thatsudo pkillis surely dangerous but have you triedsudo psDooMyet?) I was only trying to show how small ideas can be coupled together to form larger ones, I should have picked another example but ...The problem with trying to show`The Way`is that the best examples only apply to the business rules at hand ... AKAThe Job.As much as I love using this command, dragging and dropping files is just more intuitive:find /Volumes/LOSSLESS/ -name *.m4a -exec ffmpeg -i "{}" -acodec libmp3lame -ab 192k -vsync 2 -f mp3 "{}.mp3" \;

author: CatalinaWOW
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2019, 01:00:34 am
content: Funny how time gaps develop when looking back. No question that Unix precedes DOS, and that DOS was heavily influenced by Unix and its derivatives. But Unix was developed in 1969-1970. CP/M was developed in 1974 and was certainly highly influenced by Unix. MS-DOS followed in 1980 and added its own small variations.Things were bubbling pretty quickly in that decade. Many of the differences were influenced by personal preference of those involved since they were very small development teams. Others were influenced by legal issues as all of these were being monetized to one degree or another. With food fights over who owned which improvement and whether they had the right to use the base system that was being improved. As I recall AT&T was very ambivalent about Unix wavering back and forth between full proprietary and some form of open source. They licensed it for educational use at one point leading to Berkely Unix.

author: Nusa
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2019, 02:13:18 am
content: Dragging and dropping required both a pointing device (invented, but no market penetration prior to mid-1980's) and a graphics interface (ditto).The command line was THE way to do things for a long time, and for many things still is. VI was written without the mouse in mind...which is why it's still easy to use without having to touch one, even today. Not that I personally had a choice, since I didn't have a mouse when I learned it.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 20, 2019, 06:47:50 am
content: Glenn, I was a DOS/Windows person all my life up until a few years ago. I was a sys admin for one of Australia's largest telcos back in the day. I even ridiculed "open source nerds" back then.I WAS WRONG.I exclusively use FreeBSD and Linux for everything from my servers to my everyday desktop computer and I have never looked back.I found that using Linux command line wasn't all that different or difficult. I actually found my knowledge of MS-DOS syntax and understanding how commands work helped immensely and it only took a week or so to pick up. I find myself typing ls or sudo in a Windows command prompt now at work (which gets a little annoying), but these days, Linux is leaps and bounds ahead of what Windows 10 has become. Windows 10 is a pile of poo even compared to Windows XP.With distros such as Ubuntu, MX Linux, Manjaro and many others, putting so much development into their products, they are just about ready for the mainstream user market. Even gaming on Linux has come such a long way and it's only getting better. All of the games I play run natively on Linux or seamlessly in WINE (granted, I'm not a huge gamer). Gone are the days where you have to faff around trying to get video card drivers to work properly, it's literally just click through the install options.I tried probably 10 different Linux distros before finally settling withMX Linuxas my daily driver. This is what works for me. My advice is: Don't listen to the fanboys, test different products and find out what works best for you. Keep at it and I think you'll like what you see.

author: Zucca
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 20, 2019, 11:46:10 am
content: Done! I will listen to you!My new PC will have linux on bare metal and a VM with windows for emergencies.My most concerns were the driver in Linux, but times are changed.I am still surprised that big SW companies like Adobe did not pulled the trigger yet.

author: Ed.Kloonk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2019, 07:38:29 pm
content: Quote from: Zucca on December 20, 2019, 11:46:10 amAdobe will never run anything natively on Linux and be actively promoted. If they did, the community pressure would be for them to unveil the holy grail software code. That company's code bases are such a hot mess the laughter would be too embarrassing.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2019, 10:57:27 pm
content: Quote from: Ed.Kloonk on December 20, 2019, 07:38:29 pmWhy would they need to release their source code? There is no obligation to do that. In the past Adobe used to have Linux versions of their software but it seems they have pulled to plug on that. A pity because the PDF reader from Adobe worked really well on Linux (compared to the open source alternatives).

author: Ed.Kloonk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2019, 03:19:35 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on December 20, 2019, 10:57:27 pmBecause binary blobs are sooo last decade.

author: GlennSprigg
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 25, 2019, 12:54:16 pm
content: Quote from: Halcyon on December 20, 2019, 06:47:50 amThanks Halcyon. Yep, I've decided that the 'MX Linux' you suggested will be the one!I've read all the reviews, what it does, including all the Hows and Whys, and it makes sense!!

author: GlennSprigg
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 25, 2019, 02:30:18 pm
content: P.S. To some other responders from page 1/2, I wasn't 'ranting'It was more tongue-in-cheek from a newbie in the Linux field.I also hadn't thought about the pre-dating from DOS. Thanks for the education.It's just totally new to me, and is obviously a good O.S. Just a new learning curve.

author: Ed.Kloonk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 25, 2019, 08:05:59 pm
content: Quote from: GlennSprigg on December 25, 2019, 02:30:18 pmKeep a notebook (or indeed a text file) handy with the console commands you find useful as you find them. Date the entries. Every so often look back though the entries. If there's still something not understood, ask.If you really wanna dig deep into the historical whys, there's a book called The art of unix programming.http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/taoup/html/

author: SparkyFX
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 25, 2019, 08:31:05 pm
content: A few hints for learners:there are various shells with different features, the most popular (and default) is probably BASH.there used to be a set of aliases to help DOS users to learn the BASH, can't find a package, but there are countlesstutorialsonlineif you just need to navigate quickly or are afraid of breaking something due to a typo, consider installing the Midnight Commander (mc), it also gets stuff doneshould you find yourself in the situation to need some of these features on Windows, check out cygwin.check the manpages of commands, most options are so intuitive that you can learn it fast

author: Cerebus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 26, 2019, 12:48:09 am
content: Quote from: Ed.Kloonk on December 25, 2019, 08:05:59 pmBetter still, primary sources:"The UNIX Time-Sharing System"by D. M. Ritchie and K. ThompsonA paper published in the Communications of the ACM describing UNIX (15 pages, 1974). Worthwhile reading for anybody who wants to understand UNIX-like systems, in particular it concisely covers the basic philosophy of UNIX (TL;DR - everything is a file).The Evolution of the Unix Time-sharing Systemby D. M. RitchieA short history of UNIX (circa 9 pages, 1979)

author: GlennSprigg
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 27, 2019, 01:59:27 pm
content: Quote from: hazeanderson on December 20, 2019, 12:52:10 amThat's what I mean. I'm sure lines such as the above, (or parts of it!), will eventually becomeperfectly clear, you state that...dragging and dropping files is just more intuitive...So why not use the GUI if it's available? I understand the CLI is more 'powerful', it 'seems' like,(and 'please' don't anyone be offended!), that it is a learned 'Right-Of-Passage' to use the CLI.I'll get there... and will learn 'both' ways. And one day I will look back on it all, (life permitted!),and wonder what I was worried about!

author: Ed.Kloonk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 27, 2019, 02:59:26 pm
content: Quote from: GlennSprigg on December 27, 2019, 01:59:27 pmDragging and dropping files in the GUI? Sure.The command line above appears to be something that is used often rather than a once off. I read it asfinding any*.m4afiles in directory/volumes/LOSSLESS/and convert them into mp3 files usingffmpeg.Theexeccommand runsffmpeg, feeding in the found files-i "{}"The-acodec libmp3lame -ab 192k -vsync 2 -f mp3tells ffmpeg the audio codec is a module libmp3lame.Bitrate is 192k, the -f mp3tells ffmpeg that the output container is mp3The"{}.mp3" \;tells ffmpeg to append .mp3 to the end of each processed file and the slash semicolon tells the interpreter that the exec part of the line has ended.Now, you -could- use a GUI wrapper program that lets you pick the input files and set the output parameters, but if you find a need to quickly feed music into a portable device every day, the extra work in knocking up a batch command or even a batch file sometimes is worth the effort. Here's the beauty: most polished GUI music converters can show you the command line that is has built for you and when the time comes to automate things, you can copy/paste the command to manipulate the files rather than the files themselves.Clear as mud?

author: brucehoult
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 27, 2019, 05:32:14 pm
content: From around 1990. On a Mac. Both regular MacOS MPW (Macintosh Programmer's Workshop) and A/UX provided a standard way (called "Commando") to build command lines for command line tools using a dialog box. As I recall, you typed command-return instead of just return, or added an ellipsis after the command name.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 27, 2019, 05:55:49 pm
content: For some operations Linux doesn't seem to have a piece of software. Creating an image from a CD-ROM/DVD for example. The commandline command is so short that it makes no sense to create a tool.

author: Ed.Kloonk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 27, 2019, 11:11:31 pm
content: Quote from: brucehoult on December 27, 2019, 05:32:14 pmYes. Yes!I recommend going commando. Especially in the warmer months.

author: brucehoult
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 28, 2019, 02:21:12 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on December 27, 2019, 05:55:49 pmThere are plenty of tools to try to help prevent you making "arguments in the wrong order" mistakes with DiskDestroyer.Not that "if"' and "of" seem all that difficult to me. The main error mode is forgetting up the block size.

author: Ed.Kloonk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 28, 2019, 02:27:07 am
content: One thing I've noticed recently is the distro ISO instructions are starting to include DD as a way to copy to a memory stick.DD used to be something you never told newbies about. Ever.Times have changed.

author: GlennSprigg
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 29, 2019, 12:40:44 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on December 27, 2019, 05:55:49 pmWow... That surprises me. I would have thought that Linux Builds would have had something likethe various disk creator software for Windows, to copy/extract/build the likes of '.ISO' files ?

author: Cerebus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 29, 2019, 01:09:30 pm
content: In case it's not clear, nctnico's implication was that there is usually no GUI tool for imaging CDs installed by default on most distros, whereas there are command line tools installed by default - dd being the archetypical way of imaging a CD (e.g. "dd if=/dev/sr0 of=image.iso" in its simplest form). There are in fact a number of GUI CD burners/rippers available for Linux (e.g. brasero and many others).

author: localkorner
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: January 03, 2020, 09:24:29 am
content: I've just recently taken the plunge into the Linux world with Ubuntu and I must say, i'm loving it!I know not all distro's are as 'out of the box' friendly on standard PC hardware as windows, so I went with a vendor from Ubuntu's list 'pre-installed' listhttps://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuPre-installedLazy swine, I hear you crySure, but it didn't cost me anything for installation and I bought the machine pretty much threadbare so I can use up some old RAM and drives I had lying aroundhttps://www.bargainhardware.co.uk/hp-prodesk-600-g2-sff-configure-to-orderIt is taking a little bit of getting used to the interface on Ubuntu, but I always expected that to be the case after being in the Windows world my whole life. But the speed and simplicity of a Linux OS really impresses me and I have no plans to go back at this point.

author: brucehoult
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2020, 10:18:13 am
content: Quote from: localkorner on January 03, 2020, 09:24:29 amI'm an Apple guy from way back, and still run a 2011 17" MacBook Pro and iPhone, but everything else I use is Ubuntu or Debian, from Raspberry Pi to HiFive Unleashed, to Thinkpad, to home 32 core Threadripper, to corporate servers and AWS instances.It's fantastic to have complete command line utilities and options compatibility, C source code compatibility, scripting compatibility with *zero* issues right across the computing range, on half a dozen different 32 bit and 64 bit ISAs.

author: vwestlife
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2020, 06:47:26 pm
content: Quote from: CatalinaWOW on December 20, 2019, 01:00:34 amRemember that Microsoft had its own version of UNIX, called XENIX. That is what they originally wanted high-end PC power users to move to. The plan was for MS-DOS to be the low-end consumer OS, XENIX to be the high-end OS, and for a new transitional OS called XEDOS to be released in 1982 for the IBM PC. But as MS-DOS gained in popularity, Microsoft gave up on the XEDOS idea and instead added many UNIX-like features into DOS 2.0, including subdirectories, command switches, pipes, redirection, etc.With an undocumented CONFIG.SYS command (SWITCHAR) you could even redefine the default switch character from / to - (so that DIR /W would become DIR -W), which would also change the subdirectory character from \ to / like it is in UNIX. And another undocumented CONFIG.SYS command (AVAILDEV) would represent system devices as files in the /DEV directory, just like in UNIX. But these two features remained undocumented and were dropped from DOS 3.x because they broke compatibility with existing DOS software.

author: GlennSprigg
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2020, 01:11:09 pm
content: Quote from: vwestlife on January 03, 2020, 06:47:26 pmMicrosoft has ALWAYS tried to go off on their own Tangents... probably to try and monopolize everything!After the 'Internet' started to really get going, they couldn't grasp how it was a "For the people, by the people"kind of thing. Then they brought in 'MSN' (The Microsoft Network). Does anyone still use it, or see it for what it is?Then they try to bring in 'JScript' instead of 'JavaScript', to suit their own ends, not worried about compatibility.I used to like Coding, (various languages), but now it's almost like back to square-1 with all this '.net' crap...Keep in mind, I'm old now. I don't want to re-learn everything wearing Toddler Nappies!!!

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2020, 02:25:44 pm
content: Quote from: hazeanderson on December 17, 2019, 01:41:37 pmnot true. Dos is CP/M copycat

author: brucehoult
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2020, 09:50:14 pm
content: Quote from: free_electron on January 08, 2020, 02:25:44 pmIf so, what happened to pip?

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2020, 12:30:48 am
content: Quote from: free_electron on January 08, 2020, 02:25:44 pmMore correct would be to say that DOS was a very stripped-down CP/M copycat... actually, there's a lot DOS didn't have that CP/M did, but I'm curious about the converse?

author: rstofer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2020, 01:20:54 am
content: You can always create more familiar commands with 'alias'. Suppose you just can't remember 'cat' but you really want to list a file<prompt> $ alias list='cat'Now there will be a 'list' command that invokes 'cat'. This isn't usually a good idea because 'cat' is far more than just a file lister but it works.You can see predefined aliases<prompt> $ alias{all predefined aliases print out here} Most have to do with colorizing various commands likealias ls='ls --color=auto' which adds color to the file listing WHICH I HATE! One of their color selections if effectively invisible if you have the slightest color deficiency.Aliases you create during a terminal session disappear when you close the terminal. To make them permanent edit ~/.bashrc. You will find several in that file including some useful directory utilities based on 'ls' that are commented out. Aliases don't become effective until you open another terminal.We typically use the 'bash' shell although we could use 'sh' instead. You can also install 'csh' with 'sudo apt-get install csh'. There are books about the differences and mostly, people are happy with bash for the terminal and use sh in scripts. csh is not as popular and I haven't actually used it.

author: tycz
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2020, 05:54:29 am
content: Quote from: blacksheeplogic on December 19, 2019, 05:18:29 amI don't think a command line is much better in this regard. A single wrong character or space will cause a command to fail. And the incompetent user is just an likely to write the wrong command as to click the wrong button. Not to mention that the output of many CLI programs can be incomprehensible to a user who hasn't ever used it before ('ls' is a good example of this). Anyway, better to control the machine remotely of the user doesn't know what he's doing.Your comment did remind me that that consistency is exactly what a command line interface lacks most. Every program has to be learned individually from documentation before even attempting to use it. Nothing you learn from one program's interface is useful in controlling another's when it comes the command line.For example, if somebody is familiar with GCC, knows it inside and out, and you give him Clang to work with, then all his knowledge of the GCC interface isn't worth shit. He has to pick up the manual and learn the interface all over again. This process has to be repeated for every single piece of new CLI software.GUIs on the other hand have lots of interface conventions which make it possible for the user to build on previous experience. Maybe he needs help the manual to learn MS Word, but once he's got it, he can pick up Libre Office and work without much additional effort required. This is consistency.

author: Cerebus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2020, 02:14:47 pm
content: Quote from: rstofer on January 09, 2020, 01:20:54 amNo, you don't need any colour vision deficiencies for more than one of the standard colour choices to be unreadable. I have normal colour vision and there are some combinations I can't read all. In fact I have colour discrimination vision that is as good as it gets; I can't remember the name of it but I've taken the industry standard colour discrimination test (used to assess people for jobs where accurate colour matching and the ability to detect tiny differences in hue are important) and I got the maximum possible score. So it's not you, it's the idiot who chose those colours who's the problem.

author: andersm
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2020, 02:44:42 pm
content: Quote from: tycz on January 09, 2020, 05:54:29 amThat's not the best example, since Clang explicitly tries to be GCC-compatible, and there's some cross-pollination between the projects. Of course they're not completely identical, but for a large number of projects, Clang works fine as a drop-in replacement. There's even a clang-cl driver that provides compatibility with Visual C++.

author: Cerebus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2020, 02:50:10 pm
content: Quote from: tycz on January 09, 2020, 05:54:29 amIn what regard? If you're talking about the same 'regard' as blacksheeplogic I think their position is unassailable, the command line is close to 100% consistent from Linux distribution to Linux distribution whereas the choice of GUI and the precise way it is configured is highly variable from Linux distribution to Linux distribution.QuoteOh, you're not talking in that regard, you're talking about something else entirely. The argument that "A single wrong character or space will cause a command to fail" is specious, put a wrong character or a wrong space into a field in a GUI program and that too will fail, in similar ways for similar use cases.QuoteJust plain untrue. Learn that '-v' gives you moreverboseoutput for one command and you've learned that fact for the 80% of other commands that use that flag. '-V' will usually produce aVersionbanner, '-l' alongform listing, '-r' will invokerecursion, '-a' will deliveralloutput, '-q' will make the output asquietas possible and so on. Although it is far from 100% there is a lot of consistency in flag and option usage across disparate commands.Quoteclang is pretty much 100% gcc compatible, so much so that I don't notice that I'm using clang instead of gcc until it gives me a useful, helpful error message - then I know that it's clang.QuoteYou what? The user interfaces ofWordandLibre Officeare completely different. The only user interface commonalities are those that are common to all GUI programs and are at the most basic level - a mouse does this, this is how to make a selection and so on. The remaining commonalities are underlyingproblem domaincommonalities and that's hardly surprising as they are both word processing programs designed to deal with the same problem domain.

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2020, 03:00:26 pm
content: If you don't like the colors, either usels --color=neveror define theLS_COLORSenvironment variable with your preferred ones in your profile or shell preferences file. Thedircolorscommand will help you with this.I find it idiotic to get so wound up aboutdefaults. It's your tool, take ownership of it, and bend it to your will! Why waste time complaining about defaults you can change in less than a minute? I would understand if it was a common complaint, but it isn't.Depending on the terminals you use, you're not even limited to the 16 default colors (00;30through00;37and01;30through01;37for foreground,00;40-00;47,01;40-01;47for background); many support 256 colors (38;5;nfor foreground,48;5;nfor background) or even RGB colors (38;2;r;g;bfor foreground,48;2;r;g;bfor background).If you want to try the above sequences in your Bash or POSIX shell, runprintf '\033[%smTEST\033[0m\n' 'sequence'Sheesh. You guys probably also want everyone to use the same clothes, the same size displays, and the same fonts everywhere, so you feel comfortable, huh? Configurability bad, forced uniformity good, eh?

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2020, 03:25:47 pm
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on January 09, 2020, 03:00:26 pm(Now if you take a look at Gnome 3, the team is probably the same crowd as the above guys...)

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2020, 03:39:51 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on January 09, 2020, 03:25:47 pm(And systemd, and the folks who keep saying that "Linux will not <X> until it <becomes more like Windows/Mac>, and the folks who say there are too many Linux distributions...)I do get it, though. Very few of us are taught to modify our tools to fit our needs, and are instead told to, well, almost revere them; keep them well, use them according to manufacturer guidelines, and so on. This is exactly the huge change in attitude that is needed to getreallycomfortable and efficient when using Linux.

author: T3sl4co1l
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2020, 04:13:59 pm
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on January 09, 2020, 03:39:51 pmStockholm syndrome, generalized.Most users are not smart enough to create or adapt tools themselves. It's effort enough to learn them at all, and once one usage pattern has been learned, there's no curiosity for other ways to do it, or more general approaches like creating their own tools. The pattern freezes into god-given canon, and is shared to new users as such. Questions such as "why can't we do X?" or "in Y way?" are dismissed.It is what it is. If you want your product to have the widest possible user base, you mustn't expect much from your users. Things need to be obvious and spelled out, and behavior like above will simply happen. Microsoft's riches are proof of this.Tim

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2020, 04:26:18 pm
content: Quote from: T3sl4co1l on January 09, 2020, 04:13:59 pmYes, and that is exactly why Linux developers and long-time users like me are not at all interested in widening the Linux user base at all.The main reason for anyone to switch to Linux is to get a better, more effective workflow for themselves or their users. If you do it because of theprice, you're gonna be disappointed.

author: Karel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2020, 04:38:23 pm
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on January 09, 2020, 04:26:18 pmI couldn't agree more. It would be a nightmare if the windows hordes should switch to Linux.

author: T3sl4co1l
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2020, 04:43:13 pm
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on January 09, 2020, 04:26:18 pmThere's an awful lot of them admiring that market share fraction, but not understanding why they can't make it rise further.Tim

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2020, 04:49:14 pm
content: "Basic" users just not feel confident enough about their skills and knowledge to even think about customizing something they barely know how to use in one way. So that all comes down to your level of confidence I think.That said, some approaches to software dev are taken to an extreme. Gnome 3 was a good example. There's a line between heavy customization and basic stuff. In Gnome 3, the user can't even customize very basic things using the control panel. Some things can be customized using a "tweak" application (which is already dubious per se), and that's still VERY limited. I mean, to even just change base UI colors, there's just no way outside of installing an extension (user themes) and changing the theme. All from this "tweak" thing. No way to change location of items (would require writing an extension), etc. I mean, that's VERY basic stuff that even a basic user would be able to handle without much issue there...So the extreme, IMO, and current trend is not just about making things easier for most users, but also mainly about making things easier for developers (and I mean, the ones working on this one project, not caring about developers working on other, related projects!)Which means: do not think it's all because of the dumb users. It's only partly for that. The other big part is how software dev is conducted these days, and how limiting user options means getting things on the market faster.

author: andersm
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2020, 05:17:49 pm
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on January 09, 2020, 03:00:26 pmBeing able to customize is a poor excuse for bad defaults.

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2020, 05:55:40 pm
content: As an aside, there are also a plethora of free Linux applications (many of them with CLI only implementations) that do a huge number of things that you will beat your head with a stick to try and find on a Windows machine. They exist but hard to find amid all the other software.For example, recovering a bad SDCard from a camera... lots of Windows programs of various quality which all give you previews but require payment before you can recover your data. It wasn't until I went around looking at Linux options that I found a free command-line program (testdisk and photorec) that I realized they also compiled it for DOS/Windows, Mac and others. It was a tiny fraction of the download size, will read your entire SDCard and dump it into a recovery folder.Another example... There are PDF tools that will let you extract, modify, swap pages around no problem, and also compress PDF's down to a fraction of their size with practically no difference in quality (pstopdf, pdf2ps). Many of them CLI-only, some with GUI front-ends (PDFSam). Again, there are probably Windows ports now but until you look at Linux, lots of Windows garbage will pop up first and it will be hard to cut through all the noise.So my point is that you may have a harder time findings "gems" like these programs (and many many others) in the Windows world because there is so much other bloatware available. When you search around for the CLI-only Linux alternatives you find these free "gems" much more common and well documented by others who use them. Of course some may already be ported to other OSes but I try to go to Linux first (since that is what I use) since they are small, efficient and work well. It is not a limitation of the OS (like Windows/DOS), it is just that the Linux "culture" of open-source development, frequent CLI tool use and small avid user group spawns this type of contribution. I believe it was the case also with DOS years ago but as we got away from the CLI and Windows "dumbed down" the average user experience in favour of ease of use, we ended up with bigger bloatier wares all at a cost people were expected to be paying for convenience.

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2020, 06:01:45 pm
content: Quote from: andersm on January 09, 2020, 05:17:49 pmJust because you dislike the defaults, does not make them bad.Like I said, I'd understand if more people complained about the defaults, or if there was a better suggestion, but there isn't.

author: Cerebus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2020, 06:12:10 pm
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on January 09, 2020, 03:00:26 pmWhere do you get that from in rstofer saying he hates 'ls -color' and me agreeing with him that the default colour choices are ergonomically poor? You're putting words in both our mouths and that probably says more about your world view than it does about anybody else's. Nobody said anything even vaguelylikewhat you imply.

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2020, 06:54:11 pm
content: Quote from: Cerebus on January 09, 2020, 06:12:10 pmFrom the Snarky Semi-Sarcastic Tone store.Quote from: Cerebus on January 09, 2020, 06:12:10 pmDon't hurt yourself when climbing back down from your high moral horse; it's a long way back to ground level.

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2020, 07:00:05 pm
content: Besides, if you really claim that the choices are ergonomically poor, then prove it: give me aLS_COLORSthat is ergonomically better for most people.It is not intended as a perfect solution, you see. The defaults are not optimal for any specific person; they are just settings that are believed to work well to start with. Those who think a more ergonomic color set exists only need to provide one.If there truly is a more ergonomic color set as you claim, I'm 85% sure the maintainers of various distros and coreutils (which ls belongs to) would be exceedingly happy to change the defaults. (The problem is that they should work for both dark and light backgrounds, as different terminals have different settings. Some, like gnome-terminal and xterm, even let the user pick the background color themselves. So, what you think is "more ergonomic", might have to be suffixed by "if you use the same color scheme I do, otherwise it'll be even worse than the default".)What I believe has happened here, is that you dislike the colors and don't find they bring anything positive to the table, and because you think you know better than anybody else, you believe that your personal preference is more ergonomic. A snarky response to that is warranted, to jolt you back to your senses.

author: Cerebus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2020, 07:13:08 pm
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on January 09, 2020, 06:54:11 pmOh do grow up! You choose to read a non-existent "Snarky Semi-Sarcastic Tone" into remarks made, and then you start throwing insults around when queried for the basis for your remarks. Wishing to not be pointlessly insulted and challenging someone who does so is not "climbing onto one's moral high horse", it's simply asking for civil behaviour, something you seem to be determined to prove that you're incapable of.

author: rstofer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2020, 09:03:28 pm
content: Quote from: T3sl4co1l on January 09, 2020, 04:43:13 pmIt's because, while it is possible to bend Linux CLI to your will, maybe it could be easier to do. Can Linux exist without Google? I doubt it!It's because, even though I know the ls colors can be changed, every time I set up a system, I have to go research the fix once again. I won't remember it because it is a one-and-done deal until it comes up yet again. How about some code in .bashrc to make the change easy?I have found one solution: Comment out all the default aliases that bring color into the ls output.It's kind of like the Unity desktop. How arrogant to simply move the system buttons to the wrong side. Initially, this could be fixed with some tweaking in the user files. Now, just to square or cube arrogance, it is no longer possible to fix the arrogant move. They're in the wrong place and they're going to stay. Unfortunately, Unity is the default desktop for Ubuntu, one of the most popular distros. Yes, there are options - after chasing the problem down a rathole on Google.I'm pretty sure that, without Google, Linux would be in < 1% of desktops instead of < 2%. At least 100% of the increased desktop usage of Linux is due to Google, in my view.ETA: I see Unity has been dropped as a desktop by Canonical. Good riddance!Note that I use Linux all the time for code development. I have several variations on several machines and my Pi 4 is a pretty nice machine in its own right. But there are times I really get annoyed. I have pretty much settled on Linux Mint with the Cinnamon desktop since it's a lot like Win 10 and the system buttons are in the right place straight from the box.I think *nix development stopped about BSD 4.3. I have a couple of PiDP11s running BSD 2.11 (a LOT like 4.3) and, somehow, it gets along well on a monochrome terminal. No colors at all! No X-11 that I'm aware of, just a simple command line system with Pascal, C and Fortran. Networking is the usual stuff so LPR works with vi and ed as the editors. This is a GREAT environment - simple, uniform and clean. Not necessarily productive when editing...In directory listings executable files have an * at the end of the name. Sub-directories have a / at the end of the sub-directory name. There's something satisfying using a simple Unix system in the manner expected.

author: rstofer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2020, 09:30:36 pm
content: Here is LS_COLORS, ready to modifyCode:LS_COLORS=rs=0:di=01;34:ln=01;36:mh=00:pi=40;33:so=01;35:do=01;35:bd=40;33;01:cd=40;33;01:or=40;31;01:mi=00:su=37;41:sg=30;43:ca=30;41:tw=30;42:ow=34;42:st=37;44:ex=01;32:*.tar=01;31:*.tgz=01;31:*.arc=01;31:*.arj=01;31:*.taz=01;31:*.lha=01;31:*.lz4=01;31:*.lzh=01;31:*.lzma=01;31:*.tlz=01;31:*.txz=01;31:*.tzo=01;31:*.t7z=01;31:*.zip=01;31:*.z=01;31:*.dz=01;31:*.gz=01;31:*.lrz=01;31:*.lz=01;31:*.lzo=01;31:*.xz=01;31:*.zst=01;31:*.tzst=01;31:*.bz2=01;31:*.bz=01;31:*.tbz=01;31:*.tbz2=01;31:*.tz=01;31:*.deb=01;31:*.rpm=01;31:*.jar=01;31:*.war=01;31:*.ear=01;31:*.sar=01;31:*.rar=01;31:*.alz=01;31:*.ace=01;31:*.zoo=01;31:*.cpio=01;31:*.7z=01;31:*.rz=01;31:*.cab=01;31:*.wim=01;31:*.swm=01;31:*.dwm=01;31:*.esd=01;31:*.jpg=01;35:*.jpeg=01;35:*.mjpg=01;35:*.mjpeg=01;35:*.gif=01;35:*.bmp=01;35:*.pbm=01;35:*.pgm=01;35:*.ppm=01;35:*.tga=01;35:*.xbm=01;35:*.xpm=01;35:*.tif=01;35:*.tiff=01;35:*.png=01;35:*.svg=01;35:*.svgz=01;35:*.mng=01;35:*.pcx=01;35:*.mov=01;35:*.mpg=01;35:*.mpeg=01;35:*.m2v=01;35:*.mkv=01;35:*.webm=01;35:*.ogm=01;35:*.mp4=01;35:*.m4v=01;35:*.mp4v=01;35:*.vob=01;35:*.qt=01;35:*.nuv=01;35:*.wmv=01;35:*.asf=01;35:*.rm=01;35:*.rmvb=01;35:*.flc=01;35:*.avi=01;35:*.fli=01;35:*.flv=01;35:*.gl=01;35:*.dl=01;35:*.xcf=01;35:*.xwd=01;35:*.yuv=01;35:*.cgm=01;35:*.emf=01;35:*.ogv=01;35:*.ogx=01;35:*.aac=00;36:*.au=00;36:*.flac=00;36:*.m4a=00;36:*.mid=00;36:*.midi=00;36:*.mka=00;36:*.mp3=00;36:*.mpc=00;36:*.ogg=00;36:*.ra=00;36:*.wav=00;36:*.oga=00;36:*.opus=00;36:*.spx=00;36:*.xspf=00;36:This version is the default on Raspian and is all one line. I added some line breaks above.Just a tweak here and there and we're all set!

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 10, 2020, 11:28:09 am
content: Quote from: rstofer on January 09, 2020, 09:30:36 pmYep! The Ubuntu 18.04 LTS version is almost the same, just adds one for .Z suffixed files as well,:*.Z=01;31:.If e-ink -type reflective type displays get more colors and become fast enough for terminal use, I'll definitely switch from black background to a white one, and change the coloring. I've done some experiments with the colors, and could not find significant improvements in the 16-color set for use on a black background. Changing the exact color values in the terminal emulator itself to yield easily read but still distinguishing variants of those respective colors makes much more a difference; in particular, making the two blue colors brighter, so that even normal (dark) blue is legible.For gnome-terminal, I use a custom scheme with lighter dark blue etc., because I keep the brightness of my monitors very low for comfort.For text/source editing, I use Pluma, with a custom theme (with a pure black background) based on Oblivion theme.Quote from: rstofer on January 09, 2020, 09:03:28 pmYou know, it is there. If you create the.dircolorsfile in your home directory, containingdircolors -poutput with your own customizations, sayCode:# Configuration file for dircolors, a utility to help you set the# LS_COLORS environment variable used by GNU ls with the --color option.# Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Free Software Foundation, Inc.# Copying and distribution of this file, with or without modification,# are permitted provided the copyright notice and this notice are preserved.# The keywords COLOR, OPTIONS, and EIGHTBIT (honored by the# slackware version of dircolors) are recognized but ignored.# Below are TERM entries, which can be a glob patterns, to match# against the TERM environment variable to determine if it is colorizable.TERM EtermTERM ansiTERM *color*TERM con[0-9]*x[0-9]*TERM cons25TERM consoleTERM cygwinTERM dttermTERM gnomeTERM hurdTERM jfbtermTERM konsoleTERM ktermTERM linuxTERM linux-cTERM mltermTERM puttyTERM rxvt*TERM screen*TERM stTERM terminatorTERM tmux*TERM vt100TERM xterm*# Below are the color init strings for the basic file types. A color init# string consists of one or more of the following numeric codes:# Attribute codes:# 00=none 01=bold 04=underscore 05=blink 07=reverse 08=concealed# Text color codes:# 30=black 31=red 32=green 33=yellow 34=blue 35=magenta 36=cyan 37=white# Background color codes:# 40=black 41=red 42=green 43=yellow 44=blue 45=magenta 46=cyan 47=white#NORMAL 00 # no color code at all#FILE 00 # regular file: use no color at allRESET 0 # reset to "normal" colorDIR 01;34 # directoryLINK 01;36 # symbolic link. (If you set this to 'target' instead of a# numerical value, the color is as for the file pointed to.)MULTIHARDLINK 00 # regular file with more than one linkFIFO 40;33 # pipeSOCK 01;35 # socketDOOR 01;35 # doorBLK 40;33;01 # block device driverCHR 40;33;01 # character device driverORPHAN 40;31;01 # symlink to nonexistent file, or non-stat'able file ...MISSING 00 # ... and the files they point toSETUID 37;41 # file that is setuid (u+s)SETGID 30;43 # file that is setgid (g+s)CAPABILITY 30;41 # file with capabilitySTICKY_OTHER_WRITABLE 30;42 # dir that is sticky and other-writable (+t,o+w)OTHER_WRITABLE 34;42 # dir that is other-writable (o+w) and not stickySTICKY 37;44 # dir with the sticky bit set (+t) and not other-writable# This is for files with execute permission:EXEC 01;32# List any file extensions like '.gz' or '.tar' that you would like ls# to colorize below. Put the extension, a space, and the color init string.# (and any comments you want to add after a '#')# If you use DOS-style suffixes, you may want to uncomment the following:#.cmd 01;32 # executables (bright green)#.exe 01;32#.com 01;32#.btm 01;32#.bat 01;32# Or if you want to colorize scripts even if they do not have the# executable bit actually set.#.sh 01;32#.csh 01;32# archives or compressed (bright red).tar 01;31.tgz 01;31.arc 01;31.arj 01;31.taz 01;31.lha 01;31.lz4 01;31.lzh 01;31.lzma 01;31.tlz 01;31.txz 01;31.tzo 01;31.t7z 01;31.zip 01;31.z 01;31.Z 01;31.dz 01;31.gz 01;31.lrz 01;31.lz 01;31.lzo 01;31.xz 01;31.zst 01;31.tzst 01;31.bz2 01;31.bz 01;31.tbz 01;31.tbz2 01;31.tz 01;31.deb 01;31.rpm 01;31.jar 01;31.war 01;31.ear 01;31.sar 01;31.rar 01;31.alz 01;31.ace 01;31.zoo 01;31.cpio 01;31.7z 01;31.rz 01;31.cab 01;31.wim 01;31.swm 01;31.dwm 01;31.esd 01;31# image formats.jpg 01;35.jpeg 01;35.mjpg 01;35.mjpeg 01;35.gif 01;35.bmp 01;35.pbm 01;35.pgm 01;35.ppm 01;35.tga 01;35.xbm 01;35.xpm 01;35.tif 01;35.tiff 01;35.png 01;35.svg 01;35.svgz 01;35.mng 01;35.pcx 01;35.mov 01;35.mpg 01;35.mpeg 01;35.m2v 01;35.mkv 01;35.webm 01;35.ogm 01;35.mp4 01;35.m4v 01;35.mp4v 01;35.vob 01;35.qt 01;35.nuv 01;35.wmv 01;35.asf 01;35.rm 01;35.rmvb 01;35.flc 01;35.avi 01;35.fli 01;35.flv 01;35.gl 01;35.dl 01;35.xcf 01;35.xwd 01;35.yuv 01;35.cgm 01;35.emf 01;35# https://wiki.xiph.org/MIME_Types_and_File_Extensions.ogv 01;35.ogx 01;35# audio formats.aac 00;36.au 00;36.flac 00;36.m4a 00;36.mid 00;36.midi 00;36.mka 00;36.mp3 00;36.mpc 00;36.ogg 00;36.ra 00;36.wav 00;36# https://wiki.xiph.org/MIME_Types_and_File_Extensions.oga 00;36.opus 00;36.spx 00;36.xspf 00;36then Bash does it all for you automatically at login time.The following.dircolorswill disable color output even if when usingls --color=always:Code:# Configuration file for dircolors, a utility to help you set the# LS_COLORS environment variable used by GNU ls with the --color option.# Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Free Software Foundation, Inc.# Copying and distribution of this file, with or without modification,# are permitted provided the copyright notice and this notice are preserved.# The keywords COLOR, OPTIONS, and EIGHTBIT (honored by the# slackware version of dircolors) are recognized but ignored.# Below are TERM entries, which can be a glob patterns, to match# against the TERM environment variable to determine if it is colorizable.TERM EtermTERM ansiTERM *color*TERM con[0-9]*x[0-9]*TERM cons25TERM consoleTERM cygwinTERM dttermTERM gnomeTERM hurdTERM jfbtermTERM konsoleTERM ktermTERM linuxTERM linux-cTERM mltermTERM puttyTERM rxvt*TERM screen*TERM stTERM terminatorTERM tmux*TERM vt100TERM xterm*# Below are the color init strings for the basic file types. A color init# string consists of one or more of the following numeric codes:# Attribute codes:# 00=none 01=bold 04=underscore 05=blink 07=reverse 08=concealed# Text color codes:# 30=black 31=red 32=green 33=yellow 34=blue 35=magenta 36=cyan 37=white# Background color codes:# 40=black 41=red 42=green 43=yellow 44=blue 45=magenta 46=cyan 47=white#NORMAL 0 # no color code at all#FILE 0 # regular file: use no color at allRESET 0 # reset to "normal" colorDIR 0 # directoryLINK 0 # symbolic link. (If you set this to 'target' instead of a# numerical value, the color is as for the file pointed to.)MULTIHARDLINK 0 # regular file with more than one linkFIFO 0 # pipeSOCK 0 # socketDOOR 0 # doorBLK 0 # block device driverCHR 0 # character device driverORPHAN 0 # symlink to nonexistent file, or non-stat'able file ...MISSING 0 # ... and the files they point toSETUID 0 # file that is setuid (u+s)SETGID 0 # file that is setgid (g+s)CAPABILITY 0 # file with capabilitySTICKY_OTHER_WRITABLE 0 # dir that is sticky and other-writable (+t,o+w)OTHER_WRITABLE 0 # dir that is other-writable (o+w) and not stickySTICKY 0 # dir with the sticky bit set (+t) and not other-writable# This is for files with execute permission:EXEC 0# List any file extensions like '.gz' or '.tar' that you would like ls# to colorize below. Put the extension, a space, and the color init string.# (and any comments you want to add after a '#')You see, Bash already has the following snippet in/etc/bash.bashrc, the system-wide initialization file (run before user-specific initialization files) for interactive shells:Code:# enable color support of ls and also add handy aliasesif [ -x /usr/bin/dircolors ]; thentest -r ~/.dircolors && eval "$(dircolors -b ~/.dircolors)" || eval "$(dircolors -b)"alias ls='ls --color=auto'#alias dir='dir --color=auto'#alias vdir='vdir --color=auto'alias grep='grep --color=auto'alias fgrep='fgrep --color=auto'alias egrep='egrep --color=auto'fiIt's thetest -r ...line that does the magic. If an user has a dircolors config file,.dircolors, in their home directory, then thedircolorsutility is used to read it and emit the bash code to define the necessary environment variables. Otherwise,dircolorsis used to emit the bash code for the default colors.You do have a very good point that this is poorly documented. Where do you think it would be best documented?If a section (something about colored output) in theman lsmanpage would suffice, then firing an email with a suggested text to thebug-coreutils mailing listshould get this fixed in a reasonable timeframe; those developers happen to be quite responsive and friendly in my experience. On the other hand, this (color adjustment mechanism) is really abashfeature, so it's a bit silly to document in ls manpage how bash controls its behaviour, but how many users would think of looking for ls color adjustment information there? I don't know, but if you do, I'm willing to help to get this solved. (I do have accepted patches in these projects, although I am just a nobody.)FYI, gcc also supports colored output via a similar environment variable,GCC_COLORS. On my system,/etc/bash.bashrccontainsCode:# colored GCC warnings and errors#export GCC_COLORS='error=01;31:warning=01;35:note=01;36:caret=01;32:locus=01:quote=01'Similarly for GNU grep,GREP_COLORS, although it is unset on my machine.If these mechanisms -- since they work the same way in all these tools -- would be better described in a man page, then contacting Michael Kerrisk of theLinux man-pages projectwith a suggestion of a new man page describing these would be a very good idea. He's quite friendly, and welcomes suggestions and patches; such a new man page might need a bit of discussion on various mailing lists first, to make sure it'll suit both users and devs, but I'm pretty sure it would be welcomed as very useful.Quote from: Cerebus on January 09, 2020, 07:13:08 pmYes, dad. You know better, I'm sure.You still do not realize from your anger that the defaults are just fine for a lot of people, and that you claiming "they are ergonomically poor" is just farting in the wind? You don't even have better suggestions, just "that's so bad, oh why isn't it like I prefer it?"My point is that if you truly have a better ergonomic solution that works -- instead of just believing your personal preference is better and everyone else should be using yours too --, we do have the tools to change them; and it is less work than just complaining about it.For personal use, just add a line in your .profile or create the .dircolors file. For better ergonomics, send a mail to the maintainers.See? It is you who is claiming superiority, and blaming the tool, when you yourself are too inept to change anything for the better. In my opinion, that warrants a snarky remark, followed by actual help in the form of examples. When you calm down and see how silly your own opinion and behaviour is, you'll see how useful this snarkiness has actually been. Without it, my suggestion would have been completely ignored.The funniest thing here is that I value rstofer a lot, and always find the posts interesting and helpful. If I didn't care, I would have remained silent. But, because I know rstofer has the capability (and probably affects a lot of other Linux users), I thought a hard nudge was in order to clear the misunderstanding. You, Cerebus, on the other hand, I'm neutral on: I haven't seen you help others like rstofer often does.

author: Cerebus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 10, 2020, 01:50:36 pm
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on January 10, 2020, 11:28:09 amThe only person who seems to be exhibiting anger here is you, shouting at people for taking an attitude that you have imagined they are taking. Then you further go on to assume that the two people who have an issue with the default colours are incapable of changing them or overriding the default coloured ls alias that most/many linux distributions ship with. I know I can do it, and do, and I bet rstofer can too.Even if we can't or couldn't or won't alter the defaults, it doesn't invalidate our opinions that some of the defaults are horrible. You seem to think that someone whose opinion differs from yours is a valid excuse to belittle and insult them and claim that they have said or done things that they haven't. That's neither adult, nor civil behaviour. You seem to feel the need to force your opinion on others on what is, when all is said and done, a trivial issue, by berating them, inventing things like "It is you who is claiming superiority" when neither rstofer or I have, even implicitly, claimed any superiority, claiming that we're incompetent to change the behaviour in question, that we're "blaming the tools" and so on, when all we're doing is voicing the opinion that some of the default colour choices are ergonomically poor. If you overreact and become unpleasantly ill-mannered over something this trivial, what do you do when someone disagrees with you about something important? Frame them for a crime? Stab them?The dircolors defaults are objectively poor, not in their entirety but in places.An example from Debian, with standard system defaults*:Note that both setuid files and files with the sticky bit set are hard to read with the default colour scheme.They are trying to highlight setuid files, that's good. At the same time they make the filenames hard to read, that's bad. That's particularly problematic if someone's maliciously changed a link to a setuid file and you don't spot that it's the wrong file that's linked to because it's hard to read at a glance. Try an 'ls -l' of /sbin and see if you can easily make out what's linked to what. (There are better ways of ensuring the integrity of system files than hoping to find malicious setuid changes by happenstance, but it's surprising how many systems problems get fixed by someone going "Hold on, what's that file doing there?" while they're working on something else.)I'm assuming that you know what you're talking about, which is perhaps wrong of me; perhaps you've never encountered this and therefore have never seen the problem, after all setuid and sticky bits are things that one wouldn't expect an average user to encounter all that often, if at all, whereas experienced system administrators have to deal with them all the time.*To be clear, standard defaults forlscolours, the settings for both prompt colours and ls time stamps are my normal overrides of the defaults.

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 10, 2020, 03:10:04 pm
content: Quote from: Cerebus on January 10, 2020, 01:50:36 pmNo, I don't. Reread the thread to see that.I use a snarky, spiky response to raise heckles, then show factual help and advice on solving the issue. It works: on those capable, it makes them think. On those not capable, it makes them retaliate. If I omit the snarky bit, the advice is ignored. So, I find the snarky bit necessary when others might be lead astray by the associated misconceptions, as the most effective way to correct the misconceptions.Quote from: Cerebus on January 10, 2020, 01:50:36 pmGo play SWJ on twitter, please. Here, that sort of indignant posturing is met with laughter, as is proper.Quote from: Cerebus on January 10, 2020, 01:50:36 pmUnless you prove that by showing a better set, that is just farting in the wind: no positive value to anyone, just stinking up someone elses air.I could voice my opinion that you are an <X> with an inflated <Y>, but doing so is also just farting in the wind, and contributes nothing to this thread. What you write here shows that already, and those who care, will see it for themselves; there is absolutely no reason for me to do so.As I mentioned above, I have not encountered anyone who had a better set of default ls/grep/gcc ANSI color outputs.What I do have encountered, and have helped others set, quite a few times, is adjust the representation of those 16 colors in their preferred terminal emulator and text editors, including background color,to better suit their particular use case. This is the key point here.The default color set is explicitly designed to not be optimal for anyone, but to work with both dark and light backgrounds. Different terminal emulators, and different desktop environments, default to a different terminal background color, and bash cannot detect it in a portable manner. So, the default set is a compromise, and must be treated as such.This is typical to Linux: the defaults work for most situations, but to make the system work well for you, you need to override them.If the developers assumed, like you do, that terminal emulators typically have a white background, then they could have picked a better set; but that set would almost certainly be completely horrible for the other half of terminal emulators that default to a dark background. For example, on this Ubuntu 18.04 LTS installation, gnome-terminal, mate-terminal, terminator, and xterm all default to a dark background.For Xterm, it depends on your local/etc/X11/app-defaults/XTerm-colorfile, and what you have set for the*VT100*background:setting.The developers, however, have been completely open about this, and have tried to make it as easy as possible for users to override the color sets, both the ANSI color sequences used for different elements viaLS_COLORS/GCC_COLORS/GREP_COLORS, and the actual display representation of those colors, to match their own workflow: their preferred terminal emulator color scheme including background color, and use cases.Can you see the fundamental disjoint here? That the defaults are not intended to be polished or ergonomic forany specificuser case like yours, but are a set that works in all situationswell enough? And thatthatis exactly the huge alien idea I'm trying to get you to understand?Commercial products need to have a specific supported polished configuration, with users on their own if they deviate from it.Some push that to Linux also, and that is what I oppose.It is a bug of sorts to have to dig up through documentation (other than a quickman -k colors,man bash, orman ls) to find this functionality, and if rstofer has some advice on where the documentation should be for users to be more likely to find it, I've already offered to help push a fix to that. (I now thinkman dircolorswould be the best place, but it'll be next Thursday I talk to suitable testvictimsusers to see if they'd find the advice there.)But to claim that the defaults are bad is wrong, because the defaults are supposed to work on different background colors, and therefore cannot be optimal or even particularly ergonomic for your case; and to not realize that your particular terminal background color is not a given by any means, is just silly. Shellfish, even.The only reasonable action, aside from making the documentation better, is tocustomizethe tool to fit your needs best.See? I've been trying to help you see this seemingly alien idea all along. I'm not angry, I'm not shouting; I'm just using whatever tools I have to point it out. If I do it nicely and in a politically correct manner, the idea is lost among the babble. The snarkiness itself is just a tool to get others to notice the alien idea here.So calm down and look at the world you've missed for your presuppositories.

author: Cerebus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 10, 2020, 04:05:35 pm
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on January 10, 2020, 03:10:04 pmThe particular defaults that I find badexplicitly setthe background colour and thenexplicitly seta low contrast foreground colour on top of it - the basic window background colour doesn't come into it, so the argument that they are chosen to work well on a range of background colours is fundamentally flawed.Shorely (sic) this is obvious, even to someone as crabby as you.(Not personally a fan of using smileys on such an obvious joke as this, but I suspect subtlety might be lost on you.)QuoteThat sounds very much like an almost verbatim admission that the rudeness and other low behaviour is just the attention seeking it appears to be. One doesn't have to be rude or abrasive to get people to listen to one, in fact quite the reverse is generally true unless one is trying to be a demagogue.QuoteI think you mean "presuppositions", a suppository is something very different...It's quite clear that any appeal to you not to be needlessly rude or abrasive will fall on deaf ears, as it is also clear that any suggestion that there might be some poor choices in the default dircolors scheme isn't going to get past your rigid thinking on the subject, so I'm outta here. I'm betting that you're exactly the type who isn't going to let me have the last word on this, so feel free to rattle on about it, but I won't be listening.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 10, 2020, 04:09:42 pm
content: Are you guys realizing you're fighting over colors? Seriously...

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 10, 2020, 05:06:46 pm
content: Quote from: Cerebus on January 10, 2020, 04:05:35 pmIt reads just fine on my terminal:Not optimal, sure, but still legible. The reason it is not black (su=30;41instead ofsu=37;41) is that black on red background is already used for files with capabilities, and the other possible standard colors are worse. You could argue that they should be swapped, because setuid binaries are more common than files with capabilities, and black-on-red is indeed more readable than gray-on-red.(In many situations, though, file capabilities are more appropriate than setuid. For example, if a process needs to bind to a TCP port 1-1024, it is better to give it the CAP_NET_BIND_SERVICE, viasudo setcap cap_net_bind_service=pe /path/to/binary, and run that service as a dedicated user, rather than run it as root. That is, the counterargument to the argument above is that we should use file capabilities more often than setuid.)Quote from: Cerebus on January 10, 2020, 04:05:35 pmWordplay.Quote from: Cerebus on January 10, 2020, 04:05:35 pmAs I explained, rudeness/abrasiveness was necessary, because otherwise the advice is ignored. I know from long experience.Quote from: Cerebus on January 10, 2020, 04:05:35 pmChoice implies a something better exists. I have not seen anything better, so claiming the choices poor is a baseless claim. Prove it, and I'll apologise profusely. Do note that it must work for different terminal backgrounds, and you cannot simply ignore all the other thingslscolors (including things like make the foreground black making setuid files indistinguishable from files with capabilities).My entire point is that these defaults are intended for you to replace with something that works better for you, unless the default happens to suffice. I have seen users who remove the aliases (or replace them with--color=never), and I have shown others how to adjust what "red" looks like in their terminal, but I have not seen anyone with a better set ofLS_COLORS.In short, I'm trying to get you to see that this kind of thing happens in almost all Linux applications (aside from Gnome, systemd, and the other ones who steer away from the Unix philosophy, and the idea that the user is in total control of the tool),and you should feel it normal to adjust the defaults.This is because Linux works on so many different architectures, situations, and workflows, that the defaults are not going to cut it, if you want comfort, ergonomics, or efficiency. It is not a fault; it is a built-in aspect that goes so deep that most people never realize it when they adopt the idea.Quote from: Cerebus on January 10, 2020, 04:05:35 pmWell, like I said, my goal was to point you to the idea of customization-as-a-necessary-part, and make sure that newbies reading this thread have at least a possibility to see, perhaps even grasp that idea. I don't mind it if this made you hate me, if in time this affects even one or two newbies' approach.You see, the entire idea is core to how to make Linux work for someone. If you find you don't like something in Inkscape or Gimp, rather than go on Twitter lambasting how poor their defaults are, you go and modify the configuration files to make them work better. You tinker with them a bit, maybe modify the code if the configuration files don't have enough knobs. If you succeed, you let the maintainers know of the better way.This way there is more chance for everybody to win.It also means that if you are a team leader, CTO, or in a similar position, and you see that your current Linux tools do not work well enough for you, you know what to do: get someone to analyse your workflows, and propose a better configuration to suit those workflows. If you cannot afford to pay for completely new software, you might be able to let your workers dedicate a fraction of their working time to write better tools, and even set a small bounty for anyone who succeeds.This is completely different to what most companies do nowadays. They buy off-the-shelf software, and that's it. It is the core idea that differs.Quote from: SiliconWizard on January 10, 2020, 04:09:42 pmI am actually trying to show that if you intend to use Linux efficiently, you need to understand that the defaults are not recommended, they are primarily more like a fallback that should work in all situations, and secondarily something that works well enough for most people; and that users (or system administrators for organisations) should find it natural to modify the defaults, because this applies to most Linux software.Colors are just a very good example of this situation. Like I said, I use a custom theme (variant of Oblivion), and change my terminal color representation (RGB codes used to represent the standard 16 colors), and often help others do the same to get more comfortable; I use very low brightness displays to keep eye strain low. I expect this to beutterly common.Having users I know are adept in Linux not understand the need and importance of customization is alarming to me: they're having to deal with an uncomfortable tool, for no purpose! I want to change that, but not by agreeing to force their preferences on anyone else.

author: rstofer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 10, 2020, 06:49:14 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on January 10, 2020, 04:09:42 pmIt's kind of a big deal because it is far from intuitive how to deal with the issue. Right up front, I acknowledge that the problem is all mine; I have defective red-green color vision. There are color combinations I simply can't see. My problem, nobody needs to cater to it. But given the opportunity to bitch about LS_COLORS, I'll take it!I understand that the colors can be redefined in a user file but I wish people who choose colors would stay away from red and deep magenta. Web pages used to be particularly problematic. People would experiment with 'pretty colors' on their pages not understanding that their content just became invisible. The default coloring of the Arduino IDE is awful! There is no possible way I can read the error messages and changing the color scheme is far from straight forward. You would expect it to be in <menu><edit><options> but no such luck.I'm not a singularity, 8% of the adult male population, but only 1% of the adult female population, have some defect in their color vision. It manifests in different ways because I can easily see stop lights and big red firetrucks but I can not tell the difference between dark blue and purple. At least not always.But it's my problem, I'll own it! And I'll probably keep bitching about LS_COLORShttps://www.allaboutvision.com/conditions/colordeficiency.htm

author: rstofer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 10, 2020, 07:58:30 pm
content: If you haven't tried 'cool-retro-term' as your terminal, you're missing out on something amazing. No, you won't get colorized directory listings but what you will get is a retro look back at the amber on black screens of yesteryear along with some amazing graphic effects. There can be a scrolling interference fringe in the background, the left edge of the display area can be warped and the first character on each line will be slightly mangled just like on the real terminals of the era. There are other color screens, some of which are more appropriate to laptops (lacking graphic horsepower).I use the terminal a lot and I don't always remember to pull up 'cool-retro-term' but I do have an icon on the desktop for doing it. When I use it, I am reminded of the late '70s when I was doing time share with the campus computer while in grad school. A 110 baud acoustic coupler, something predating the ADM-3 terminal I bought about half way through and being actually amazed at the speed of the school's Data General Basic. In the same timeframe, I bought the Altair 8800 which I still have. The ADM-3 is long gone but I still have an TV950 which is a very nice terminalIf you have to use the terminal, it might as well be 'cool'.https://github.com/Swordfish90/cool-retro-term

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 10, 2020, 10:09:32 pm
content: Quote from: rstofer on January 10, 2020, 06:49:14 pmNo, but there are lots of folks who are willing to help, if you'll do the hard work (testing suggestions, giving thoughtful feedback, help with documentation).For example, I would recommend you consider redefining the colors in your terminal emulator instead. There are only sixteen, so perhaps it would be possible to use actual colors/shades you can distinguish well? Yes, they are intended to be black-red-green-yellow-blue-magenta-cyan-white and their bright/bold counterparts, but it is just aconvention, nothing put in stone. "red" is often used for errors, "green" for success messages, but otherwise they are basically arbitrary.As you point out, red-green is difficult for many to perceive (and I believe some countries use blue instead of green in streetlights partly for that reason?), so having a set of 16 colors used in terminal emulators that avoids those associated difficulties, would most definitely be useful!The problem is, that those of us with normal color vision, cannot really design or even test such palettes. (I could write a numerical simulator using CIE Lab color space, selecting the 16 colors using an Lb plane (a component is red-green difference, you see), and find some candidate sets, but I have no way of telling how those with red-green perception difficulties would perceive the colors, or choose the "best" one!)I'm really hoping you see what I am getting after here. If people like you only complain, nothing will get better. But, if we treat the defaults as just a fallback or a tentative suggestion, we can find something that works much better for you. And if we find it, we can push it upstream, and see if it works for others as well. See?Quote from: rstofer on January 10, 2020, 06:49:14 pmBut.. wouldn't it be nicer to make it work in your favour instead?If you want a test pattern, you can runCode:for B in 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 ; do for I in '' '1;' ; do for F in 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 ; do printf '\033[%s;%sm %s;%s \033[0m ' "$I$B" $F "$I$B" $F ; done ; printf ' ' ; done ; printf '\n' ; doneto see all 128 of the normally-used color combinations. The colors should be alterable in your terminal emulator menus somewhere.

author: rstofer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 10, 2020, 11:42:53 pm
content: I appreciate the effort but I don't see myself spending any time on this. Yes, for me, it's a problem, but it doesn't follow that I want to spend any time on it. I just comment out the aliases and it's over and done.And then there is syntax coloring in vi and nano. Again, depending on the colors, the text absolutely disappears. Who thought dull red on black would work?

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 10, 2020, 11:57:07 pm
content: Wow this thread is a rollercoasterI run without colours (force xterm-mono) because quite frankly getting everything to work properly is a ball ache. Also I hop around environments and machines a lot and like hell i’m going to futz with my profile and vimrc on every damn machine. It’s just not worth it.On my control node, a VM in virtual box in windows 10 (fuck running native), it’s the same. And my PS1 is set to $ like a V7 machine. I can remember where I left my sunglasses and cwd fine thanks.Every time I see someone with technicolour vomit all over their terminal or UwUs and ASCII art in their PS1 I want to punch something.In fact it was only a few weeks ago a devops colleague fork bombed the ssh relay box in a spectacular profile customisation fail.“I can’t login. It just hangs”“Ps on box ... ooh 1024 bash shell processes”Good job I set up ulimits properly, which I had time to do because I wasn’t fucking around trying to read red on blue text in vim.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 11, 2020, 01:30:01 am
content: Quote from: rstofer on January 10, 2020, 11:42:53 pmI'm not color blind but I do spend time on the color scheme of the terminals in Linux when running in X-windows.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 11, 2020, 02:11:38 am
content: I have a .bashrc that fits me well and I copy it to any home directory I use. Simple and effective. You just have to worry about customizing it once.