3 ms·

> And terminal colors are just garish, but that's a matter of taste. You can change the specific colors used by your terminal emulator, at least for the basic

> And terminal colors are just garish, but that's a matter of taste. You can change the specific colors used by your terminal emulator, at least for the basic 16 colors. > E.g., why should "ls" assign different file types different colors? Did I ask for it? Are they not all file names? I agree that coloring .tgz is useless. But it is useful to be able to tell directories, executables, symlinks apart (I also use the -F flag to have a textual indicator). > Did I ask for it? Why should `ls` show files in alphabetical order? Wouldn’t the last-use order be more helpful? Why is the default wallpaper of Windows 11 a blue flower-ish thing? Did I ask for it? Software has defaults, and then Linux distros may add their customizations on top. Are those defaults the universal best way to do things? No. But usually, you can just customize them to your liking.

tgv 3y ago
> You can change the specific colors used by your terminal emulator, at least for the basic 16 colors. Doesn't that contradict the "semantic marking" argument? Now you can't predict what the output will look like, and someone might like the color of grep output, but not ls. I simply alias most commands that output color, BTW. The GNU utils all seem to support --no-color, and that's reasonable too, and flexible, except aliasing can be a bit tricky, and you have to add it for multiple commands, and scripts often don't recognize it. The only disadvantage of NO_COLOR is that you can't unset it at the start of the command line. At least, I wouldn't know how. NO_COLOR=true/false could be switched per command. > Why should `ls` show files in alphabetical order? Wouldn’t the last-use order be more helpful? Apart from the fact that looking for a name becomes harder (and you clearly don't know what you're looking for if you only use ls), that ls -1tr is your friend, and that there always is some order, last-use order doesn't make sense for other cmd line utilities. There's no point in a global "SORT_ORDER=last-use" environment variable.
- Kwpolska 3y ago
  You can change the specific color shades to something nicer, but keep the color mapping the same (1=red, 2=green etc.), just like most of these themes: https://github.com/lysyi3m/macos-terminal-themes https://github.com/lysyi3m/macos-terminal-themes
- assbuttbuttass 3y ago
  > The only disadvantage of NO_COLOR is that you can't unset it at the start of the command line. At least, I wouldn't know how. env -u NO_COLOR command...
- geocar 3y ago
  > The only disadvantage of NO_COLOR is that you can't unset it at the start of the command line. There is no need. An empty string is equivalent according to the spec, so: NO_COLOR= command is fine. > The GNU utils all seem to support --no-color, and that's reasonable too, and flexible, except aliasing can be a bit tricky, and you have to add it for multiple commands, and scripts often don't recognize it. I have more luck with setting the environment variables, e.g. LS_COLORS="rs=0:di=0:ln=0:mh=0:pi=0:so=0:do=0:bd=0:cd=0:or=0:mi=0:su=0:sg=0:ca=0:tw=0:ow=0:st=0:ex=0:*=0:" GREP_COLORS=ms=0:mc=0:sl=:cx=:fn=0:ln=0:bn=0:se=0

tgv 3y ago

> You can change the specific colors used by your terminal emulator, at least for the basic 16 colors. Doesn't that contradict the "semantic marking" argument? Now you can't predict what the output will look like, and someone might like the color of grep output, but not ls. I simply alias most commands that output color, BTW. The GNU utils all seem to support --no-color, and that's reasonable too, and flexible, except aliasing can be a bit tricky, and you have to add it for multiple commands, and scripts often don't recognize it. The only disadvantage of NO_COLOR is that you can't unset it at the start of the command line. At least, I wouldn't know how. NO_COLOR=true/false could be switched per command. > Why should `ls` show files in alphabetical order? Wouldn’t the last-use order be more helpful? Apart from the fact that looking for a name becomes harder (and you clearly don't know what you're looking for if you only use ls), that ls -1tr is your friend, and that there always is some order, last-use order doesn't make sense for other cmd line utilities. There's no point in a global "SORT_ORDER=last-use" environment variable.

Kwpolska 3y ago
You can change the specific color shades to something nicer, but keep the color mapping the same (1=red, 2=green etc.), just like most of these themes: https://github.com/lysyi3m/macos-terminal-themes https://github.com/lysyi3m/macos-terminal-themes
assbuttbuttass 3y ago
> The only disadvantage of NO_COLOR is that you can't unset it at the start of the command line. At least, I wouldn't know how. env -u NO_COLOR command...
geocar 3y ago
> The only disadvantage of NO_COLOR is that you can't unset it at the start of the command line. There is no need. An empty string is equivalent according to the spec, so: NO_COLOR= command is fine. > The GNU utils all seem to support --no-color, and that's reasonable too, and flexible, except aliasing can be a bit tricky, and you have to add it for multiple commands, and scripts often don't recognize it. I have more luck with setting the environment variables, e.g. LS_COLORS="rs=0:di=0:ln=0:mh=0:pi=0:so=0:do=0:bd=0:cd=0:or=0:mi=0:su=0:sg=0:ca=0:tw=0:ow=0:st=0:ex=0:*=0:" GREP_COLORS=ms=0:mc=0:sl=:cx=:fn=0:ln=0:bn=0:se=0