10 ms·

>Wishlist: tmux, emacs, vi, netcat, shell option for vi-mode, rc-file with preferences, ncurses library, something simpler than curses, zip and unzip No thanky

by halo 11y ago

>Wishlist: tmux, emacs, vi, netcat, shell option for vi-mode, rc-file with preferences, ncurses library, something simpler than curses, zip and unzip No thankyou. I can certainly understand including SSH support, but I don't want what is pretty much the only remaining viable non-Unix platform to start bundling horribly dated and clunky Unix-like commands and bloated GNU tools.

cactusface 11y ago
regedit would like to have coffee with you.
- blazingfrog2 11y ago
  Or you could use the PowerShell command line. http://blogs.technet.com/b/heyscriptingguy/archive/2012/03/16/use-powershell-to-edit-the-registry-on-remote-computers.aspx http://blogs.technet.com/b/heyscriptingguy/archive/2012/03/1...
  - cactusface 11y ago
    You can't polish a turd, but you can roll it in PowerShell?
wumbernang 11y ago
Couldn't agree more. As a die hard Unix guy and ex Slashdot-esque zealot (colloquially a bit of a twat). Yet I'm knocking out PowerShell all the time now and dread having to log into the pile of CentOS kit I have lying around. It is arcane. Even after 15 years I spend most of my time in the manpages or working out another damn config format. Literally did a two liner to scrape a web page, parse it and call a REST endpoint with the parsed data as JSON in PowerShell. I cant even use python now. I've been broken. It makes me cringe saying all this as well kind of like a racist making amends with his past. The only thing I still hate is windows update.
- halo 11y ago
  I'm not even a Powershell fan, I'm just not especially fond of Unix-likes, which feel like a local maximum that has turned into an unchangable standard. I think Unix-like environments feel dated, clunky and there's a tendancy for it to result in permanent bloat, stagnation and a web of interdependencies. I understand that lots of people are familiar with Unix-like tools and their many idiosyncrasies and like to be able to transfer that knowledge across platforms. But that doesn't mean there isn't merit to a platform not conforming to that and trying to improve on it.
  - pjc50 11y ago
    Lots of people keep using the word "bloat" to refer to Linux as opposed to Windows, which I find bizarre given that it's long been a criticism in the other direction.
    - tcfunk 11y ago
      Yeah, I would genuinely like to know what all is considered to be bloat within the Unix space. If anyone could point to some information about this I'd be curious.
      - cactusface 11y ago
        X11, KDE, GNOME, GCC, Emacs, Mozilla? Any huge project I guess. The GNU command line tools are not as lean as the BSD ones but so what?
        Thetawaves 11y ago
        They also generally have more (useful) features than the BSD ones.
        fallat 11y ago
        Not only that but they include more documentation inside the binary. Someone also pointed out to me one time that some features in some GNU utils are only possible to have if they are implemented in the binary, rather as a separate program.
pyre 11y ago
> bloated GNU tools If you were coming from the Unix/BSD world, I could understand this, but how is using a GUI for everything considered elegant, while GNU tools are considered "bloated?" Doesn't the GUI necessarily "bloat" the program more than a few extra command-line options would?
- maximilianburke 11y ago
  You don't need a GUI; PowerShell is a powerful command line scripting environment.
  - psykovsky 11y ago
    Which needs a full desktop environment to be used. Or am I wrong?
    - pjc50 11y ago
      It doesn't involve the desktop environment unless you ask it to, and you can invoke it remotely from outside. The system does boot to GUI, but the overhead of that with nobody logged in is not very large. Embedded Windows, on the other hand, is forever the poor relation.
      - psykovsky 11y ago
        Still no alt+F1 to alt+F7, right? That would be cool to have. I'm really curious, as I made the leap to Ubuntu years ago and the most I've touched windows is doing reinstalls on friends computers.
        hackmiester 11y ago
        It's true, but you can log in multiple users, or log in users multiple times, and these run in distinct areas, kind of like virtual terminals. These are called "sessions." http://blogs.technet.com/b/askperf/archive/2007/07/24/sessions-desktops-and-windows-stations.aspx http://blogs.technet.com/b/askperf/archive/2007/07/24/sessio...
pjc50 11y ago
Of that list, I can only see downsides to the middle ones: "emacs, vi, netcat, shell option for vi-mode, rc-file with preferences". Who uses vi-mode in the shell? And Windows already has a boatload of editors. Windows could do a lot better than curses by providing easy means to pop MFC dialogs from the shell to prompt the user. Zip and unzip are already available, in https://pscx.codeplex.com/ https://pscx.codeplex.com/
- lzybkr 11y ago
  At least a few people want vi-mode in the shell, see https://github.com/lzybkr/PSReadLine/pull/101 https://github.com/lzybkr/PSReadLine/pull/101
- cturner 11y ago
  > Who uses vi-mode in the shell? There's at least a dozen of us. It's my wishlist :) > Windows could do a lot better than curses by > providing easy means to pop MFC dialogs from > the shell to prompt the user. When you work in an environment with a lot of hosts, Windows is a laborious partner. You need to open remote desktops and click windows to push the OS around. With unix you often have processes that start out being manual, and which gradually get sewn up into automation. With deliberate effort, you can build automation to Windows platforms. But in unix, one guy with a clue can create vast value working with the defaults. Even on an ancient Solaris box with no compiler or extra tools installed. If you're desperate you'll be able to find a shell that can open a socket server or staple some awk together to get a result. Windows powershell is a vision of what a shell can be that has grown up separate to the unix world. In a fair world it would be considered heavy-lifting-equipment, like bash or emacs lisp. It would be thriving. But it has lived in a straight-jacket because until now Microsoft has forced operators to to interact with it via the windows GUI. MFC popups would undermine the benefits of SSH. If you're worried about your shell hanging at a background window event, you'll avoid using it in anger. Same issue with editors. Existing editors require the GUI layer. A strength of ssh is how well it suits you when you want to dive on to a host and make a fast change.
  - metaobject 11y ago
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
ubercow 11y ago
Powershell will need some kind of text editor though, even if it's just something as simple as nano.
- qnaal 11y ago
  Edlin. The Standard Microsoft Text Editor.
  - _pmf_ 11y ago
    > Edlin. The Standard Microsoft Text Editor. One line is enough for everyone.
chetanahuja 11y ago
"the only remaining viable non-Unix platform" Why do you think that is? As in, why is everyone else on unix (like toolchains)? Why do you think pretty much the entire tech-stack of mobile and web companies has moved to Linux or BSD as the default choice. The reason is clear. The unix "small tools connected by text based pipes" philosophy has won. Whether disaffected powershell users find it clunky or not is not the point. Unix tools are the lingua-franca of developers everywhere. There are many reasons for this but the most important is that the commandline toolset for managing a machine from a remote terminal has always been the most important UI for unix over the last forty years. You can call it "dated". The industry calls it "the standard". The irony here is that Microsoft itself has come to the realization that they have to follow where the developer ecosystem is inexorably marching en mass. There will of course be a certain percent of holdouts clinging to their powershells. But now they'll be fighting against not only the linux'er and BSD'rs. But Microsoft management itself.

by halo 11y ago

cactusface 11y ago

regedit would like to have coffee with you.

blazingfrog2 11y ago
Or you could use the PowerShell command line. http://blogs.technet.com/b/heyscriptingguy/archive/2012/03/16/use-powershell-to-edit-the-registry-on-remote-computers.aspx http://blogs.technet.com/b/heyscriptingguy/archive/2012/03/1...
- cactusface 11y ago
  You can't polish a turd, but you can roll it in PowerShell?

wumbernang 11y ago

Couldn't agree more. As a die hard Unix guy and ex Slashdot-esque zealot (colloquially a bit of a twat). Yet I'm knocking out PowerShell all the time now and dread having to log into the pile of CentOS kit I have lying around. It is arcane. Even after 15 years I spend most of my time in the manpages or working out another damn config format. Literally did a two liner to scrape a web page, parse it and call a REST endpoint with the parsed data as JSON in PowerShell. I cant even use python now. I've been broken. It makes me cringe saying all this as well kind of like a racist making amends with his past. The only thing I still hate is windows update.

halo 11y ago
I'm not even a Powershell fan, I'm just not especially fond of Unix-likes, which feel like a local maximum that has turned into an unchangable standard. I think Unix-like environments feel dated, clunky and there's a tendancy for it to result in permanent bloat, stagnation and a web of interdependencies. I understand that lots of people are familiar with Unix-like tools and their many idiosyncrasies and like to be able to transfer that knowledge across platforms. But that doesn't mean there isn't merit to a platform not conforming to that and trying to improve on it.
- pjc50 11y ago
  Lots of people keep using the word "bloat" to refer to Linux as opposed to Windows, which I find bizarre given that it's long been a criticism in the other direction.
  - tcfunk 11y ago
    Yeah, I would genuinely like to know what all is considered to be bloat within the Unix space. If anyone could point to some information about this I'd be curious.
    - cactusface 11y ago
      X11, KDE, GNOME, GCC, Emacs, Mozilla? Any huge project I guess. The GNU command line tools are not as lean as the BSD ones but so what?
      - Thetawaves 11y ago
        They also generally have more (useful) features than the BSD ones.
        fallat 11y ago
        Not only that but they include more documentation inside the binary. Someone also pointed out to me one time that some features in some GNU utils are only possible to have if they are implemented in the binary, rather as a separate program.

pyre 11y ago

> bloated GNU tools If you were coming from the Unix/BSD world, I could understand this, but how is using a GUI for everything considered elegant, while GNU tools are considered "bloated?" Doesn't the GUI necessarily "bloat" the program more than a few extra command-line options would?

maximilianburke 11y ago
You don't need a GUI; PowerShell is a powerful command line scripting environment.
- psykovsky 11y ago
  Which needs a full desktop environment to be used. Or am I wrong?
  - pjc50 11y ago
    It doesn't involve the desktop environment unless you ask it to, and you can invoke it remotely from outside. The system does boot to GUI, but the overhead of that with nobody logged in is not very large. Embedded Windows, on the other hand, is forever the poor relation.
    - psykovsky 11y ago
      Still no alt+F1 to alt+F7, right? That would be cool to have. I'm really curious, as I made the leap to Ubuntu years ago and the most I've touched windows is doing reinstalls on friends computers.
      - hackmiester 11y ago
        It's true, but you can log in multiple users, or log in users multiple times, and these run in distinct areas, kind of like virtual terminals. These are called "sessions." http://blogs.technet.com/b/askperf/archive/2007/07/24/sessions-desktops-and-windows-stations.aspx http://blogs.technet.com/b/askperf/archive/2007/07/24/sessio...

pjc50 11y ago

Of that list, I can only see downsides to the middle ones: "emacs, vi, netcat, shell option for vi-mode, rc-file with preferences". Who uses vi-mode in the shell? And Windows already has a boatload of editors. Windows could do a lot better than curses by providing easy means to pop MFC dialogs from the shell to prompt the user. Zip and unzip are already available, in https://pscx.codeplex.com/ https://pscx.codeplex.com/

lzybkr 11y ago
At least a few people want vi-mode in the shell, see https://github.com/lzybkr/PSReadLine/pull/101 https://github.com/lzybkr/PSReadLine/pull/101
cturner 11y ago
> Who uses vi-mode in the shell? There's at least a dozen of us. It's my wishlist :) > Windows could do a lot better than curses by > providing easy means to pop MFC dialogs from > the shell to prompt the user. When you work in an environment with a lot of hosts, Windows is a laborious partner. You need to open remote desktops and click windows to push the OS around. With unix you often have processes that start out being manual, and which gradually get sewn up into automation. With deliberate effort, you can build automation to Windows platforms. But in unix, one guy with a clue can create vast value working with the defaults. Even on an ancient Solaris box with no compiler or extra tools installed. If you're desperate you'll be able to find a shell that can open a socket server or staple some awk together to get a result. Windows powershell is a vision of what a shell can be that has grown up separate to the unix world. In a fair world it would be considered heavy-lifting-equipment, like bash or emacs lisp. It would be thriving. But it has lived in a straight-jacket because until now Microsoft has forced operators to to interact with it via the windows GUI. MFC popups would undermine the benefits of SSH. If you're worried about your shell hanging at a background window event, you'll avoid using it in anger. Same issue with editors. Existing editors require the GUI layer. A strength of ssh is how well it suits you when you want to dive on to a host and make a fast change.
- metaobject 11y ago

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

ubercow 11y ago

Powershell will need some kind of text editor though, even if it's just something as simple as nano.

qnaal 11y ago
Edlin. The Standard Microsoft Text Editor.
- _pmf_ 11y ago
  > Edlin. The Standard Microsoft Text Editor. One line is enough for everyone.

chetanahuja 11y ago

"the only remaining viable non-Unix platform" Why do you think that is? As in, why is everyone else on unix (like toolchains)? Why do you think pretty much the entire tech-stack of mobile and web companies has moved to Linux or BSD as the default choice. The reason is clear. The unix "small tools connected by text based pipes" philosophy has won. Whether disaffected powershell users find it clunky or not is not the point. Unix tools are the lingua-franca of developers everywhere. There are many reasons for this but the most important is that the commandline toolset for managing a machine from a remote terminal has always been the most important UI for unix over the last forty years. You can call it "dated". The industry calls it "the standard". The irony here is that Microsoft itself has come to the realization that they have to follow where the developer ecosystem is inexorably marching en mass. There will of course be a certain percent of holdouts clinging to their powershells. But now they'll be fighting against not only the linux'er and BSD'rs. But Microsoft management itself.