On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 09:33 +1000, Chris Jones wrote:
> >>On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 4:37 PM, Frank Murphy
> wrote:
> On 19/04/10 23:51, Slava Zanko wrote:
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Hi folk,
> >
> > I want to
On 21/04/10 07:00, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Slava Zanko wrote:
>> For example, all present utilites have sence just for guru's (ls, rm,
>> fsck etc), but for novies it's hard to use. Is good idea to symlink'ing
>> (shell aliasing) these and much more utilz to another names?
--snip--
> 5. IMHO, that k
Slava Zanko wrote:
> For example, all present utilites have sence just for guru's (ls, rm,
> fsck etc), but for novies it's hard to use. Is good idea to symlink'ing
> (shell aliasing) these and much more utilz to another names?
No. It's a quite silly idea.
1. Those tools have been called like that
Thomas Janssen wrote:
> Agreed. Plus a command like: filesystem.remove would confuse and scare
> novices. "Ugh, that removes my filesystem"
Well, if it scares them enough not to abuse rm -rf, that's a good thing. ;-)
IMHO file deletions should always be performed through a graphical file
manager
On Tue, 2010-04-20 at 10:00 +0300, Slava Zanko wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Frank Murphy wrote:
> > Bookmark this: http://ss64.com/bash/
> I know about :) This idea just try for standartization of command
> names... I know about posix and LSB, but these standards
>>On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 4:37 PM, Frank Murphy wrote:
> On 19/04/10 23:51, Slava Zanko wrote:
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Hi folk,
> >
> > I want to propose new idea about names of command line utilites...
> >
> > For example, all present utilites have sence jus
On Tue, 2010-04-20 at 16:56 +0200, Alexander Boström wrote:
> tis 2010-04-20 klockan 01:51 +0300 skrev Slava Zanko:
>
> > For example, all present utilites have sence just for guru's (ls, rm,
> > fsck etc), but for novies it's hard to use. Is good idea to symlink'ing
> > (shell aliasing) these and
tis 2010-04-20 klockan 01:51 +0300 skrev Slava Zanko:
> For example, all present utilites have sence just for guru's (ls, rm,
> fsck etc), but for novies it's hard to use. Is good idea to symlink'ing
> (shell aliasing) these and much more utilz to another names?
The present utilities makes sense
why do I smell COBOL ?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
drago01 wrote:
>> I also against making it global by default. But this can be done
>> in separate folder, not to standard /usr/bin, and then added for
>> users who want it just add it into PATH.
Yep, of course. This idea unobtrusive and don't hard for
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 1:39 AM, Athmane Madjoudj wrote:
>>
>> I'm against making a mess of PATH with a crapload of symlinks.
>> If this were to happen, it should happen at a bashrc alias level, and even
>> then I'm still against it.
>>
>
> i agree, also the proposed commands are too long to be ty
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 2:55 PM, Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus)
wrote:
> 20.04.2010 03:29, Ryan Rix пишет:
>> On Mon 19 April 2010 3:51:23 pm Slava Zanko wrote:
>>
>>> Hi folk,
>>>
>>> I want to propose new idea about names of command line utilites...
>>>
>>> For example, all present utilites
20.04.2010 03:29, Ryan Rix пишет:
> On Mon 19 April 2010 3:51:23 pm Slava Zanko wrote:
>
>> Hi folk,
>>
>> I want to propose new idea about names of command line utilites...
>>
>> For example, all present utilites have sence just for guru's (ls, rm,
>> fsck etc), but for novies it's hard to use
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Frank Murphy wrote:
> Bookmark this: http://ss64.com/bash/
I know about :) This idea just try for standartization of command
names... I know about posix and LSB, but these standards don't make
logic in the names of commands. Okay, as I see, this idea
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 12:51 AM, Slava Zanko wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi folk,
>
> I want to propose new idea about names of command line utilites...
>
> For example, all present utilites have sence just for guru's (ls, rm,
> fsck etc), but for novies it's hard
On 19/04/10 23:51, Slava Zanko wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi folk,
>
> I want to propose new idea about names of command line utilites...
>
> For example, all present utilites have sence just for guru's (ls, rm,
> fsck etc), but for novies it's hard to use.
Bookma
2010/4/20 Bernd Stramm :
> On Tue, 2010-04-20 at 02:06 +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> 2010/4/20 Slava Zanko :
>> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> > Hash: SHA1
>> >
>> > Hi folk,
>> >
>> > I want to propose new idea about names of command line utilites...
>> >
>> > For example,
On Tue, 2010-04-20 at 02:06 +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 2010/4/20 Slava Zanko :
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Hi folk,
> >
> > I want to propose new idea about names of command line utilites...
> >
> > For example, all present utilites have sence just
Hi,
2010/4/20 Slava Zanko :
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi folk,
>
> I want to propose new idea about names of command line utilites...
>
> For example, all present utilites have sence just for guru's (ls, rm,
> fsck etc), but for novies it's hard to use. Is good idea to
On Tue, 2010-04-20 at 01:51 +0300, Slava Zanko wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi folk,
>
> I want to propose new idea about names of command line utilites...
>
> For example, all present utilites have sence just for guru's (ls, rm,
> fsck etc), but for novies it's h
>
> i agree, also the proposed commands are too long to be typed in the terminal.
>
> they look like name-spaces in a programming language
>
> Best regards
Maybe PASH is what you are searching: http://pash.sourceforge.net/
--
Athmane Madjoudj
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Tue, 2010-04-20 at 01:51 +0300, Slava Zanko wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi folk,
>
> I want to propose new idea about names of command line utilites...
>
> For example, all present utilites have sence just for guru's (ls, rm,
> fsck etc), but for novies it's h
>
> I'm against making a mess of PATH with a crapload of symlinks.
> If this were to happen, it should happen at a bashrc alias level, and even
> then I'm still against it.
>
i agree, also the proposed commands are too long to be typed in the terminal.
they look like name-spaces in a programming
On Mon 19 April 2010 3:51:23 pm Slava Zanko wrote:
> Hi folk,
>
> I want to propose new idea about names of command line utilites...
>
> For example, all present utilites have sence just for guru's (ls, rm,
> fsck etc), but for novies it's hard to use. Is good idea to symlink'ing
> (shell aliasin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi folk,
I want to propose new idea about names of command line utilites...
For example, all present utilites have sence just for guru's (ls, rm,
fsck etc), but for novies it's hard to use. Is good idea to symlink'ing
(shell aliasing) these and much
25 matches
Mail list logo
