Re: [DNG] The real reason I like Linux
Hi Steve, On 15/3/20 16:39, Steve Litt wrote: All of these are good ideas, but if it were me, I'd prioritize simple-netaid-dmenu, in which all from-list selection and all user input is done via dmenu. Gtk2, Gtk3, qt5, and ncurses are all fairly big libraries. Dmenu is tiny and depends only on X, for the simplicity lovers among us. Also, simple-netaid-dmenu would be best for the keyboard adept. If you do this, I'd suggest you make the typeface, fontsize, and colors configurable, and default the typeface to Ubuntu Mono Bold, which seems ubiquitous. Simple-netaid-dmenu wouldn't be pretty, but would be simple and lightning fast for the keyboard-adept. Naturally, I'll help test it. SteveT I still didn't give a try to dmenu. In any case, i think you are wrong in saying that ncurses is a fairly big library, unless you are comparing it with the termlib library (a low-level access to the termcap database): https://books.google.es/books?id=GsUMLqtYI1UC&pg=PA197&lpg=PA197&dq=low-level+termcap+library+C&source=bl&ots=RqLF8yM_Sb&sig=ACfU3U2qL5VG_LSqYeL_wi1cdAxLuGoZYQ&hl=es&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjx58nlnbToAhVNyoUKHZR7AAgQ6AEwAHoECAoQAQ#v=onepage&q=low-level%20termcap%20library%20C&f=false If so, don't lump ncurses with the Gtk and Qt toolkits altogether :) Btw, simple-netaid-cdk is going ahead, and i have it working on my computer : http://gnuinos.org/simple-netaid-cdk/main.c Here you are some screenshots: http://gnuinos.org/simple-netaid-cdk/screenshots/ Cheers, Aitor. ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] The real reason I like Linux
On Fri, 20 Mar 2020 05:33:04 -0400 Dan Purgert wrote: > On Mar 19, 2020, tom wrote: > > On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 21:29:51 -0400 > > Dan Purgert wrote: > > > > > > What, then, is so bad about PCI? Or hell, even ISA? > > > > > > Sure, it's super-limiting in terms of what you can buy off the > > > shelf -- but then again, so was the "compatible with Arduino(tm)" > > > market 5-10 years ago (and now look at that mess!) > > > > > > I guess what I'm trying to ask is what would be so bad about a > > > "RISC-V Hobby Linux Machine(tm)" only offering these "older" > > > peripheral connectivity interfaces in interests of being > > > inexpensive and also preserving end-user freedom? > > > > > > Or ... maybe I'm just a bit crazier than I thought. > > > > > > > Nothing wrong with that in of itself, it's just a bit odd to pair a > > RISCV cpu with only slow peripherals. Now there are RISCV > > microcontrollers you can buy that don't have an MMU so you can't run > > Linux on them, and they have all the IO you'd come to expect on a > > microcontroller, however if you want to run Linux or some other > > similar multitasking OS like NetBSD it probably makes a lot more > > sense to choose something aarch64 based purely do to how good and > > mature aarch64's IO capabilities are. > > Either I'm just horrific at asking (good) questions; or there's > something here that you're saying that I simply don't understand. > > > [...] > > But back to your question why not RISCV with slow IO. That's like of > > like pairing a Ferrari with a horse trailer. There are much better > > options out there for pulling horse trailers than sports cars. > > Sure, but if all you have is the Ferrari, and the trailer needs to get > pulled... > > > > Sorry, can you clarify or rephrase what you asking? -- _ / We don't claim Interactive EasyFlow is \ | good for anything -- if you think it| | is, great, but it's up to you to| | decide. If Interactive EasyFlow doesn't | | work: tough. If you lose a million | | because Interactive EasyFlow messes up, | | it's you that's out the million, not| | us. If you don't like this disclaimer: | | tough. We reserve the right to do the | | absolute minimum provided by law, up to | | and including nothing. | | | | This is basically the same disclaimer | | that comes with all software packages, | | but ours is in plain English and theirs | | is in legalese. | | | | We didn't really want to include any| | disclaimer at all, but our lawyers | | insisted. We tried to ignore them but | | they threatened us with the attack | | shark at which point we relented. | | | | -- Haven Tree Software Limited, | \ "Interactive EasyFlow" / - \ \ /\ /\ //\\_//\\ \_ _// / / * * \/^^^] \_\O/_/[ ] / \_[ / \ \_ / / [ [ / \/ _/ _[ [ \ /_/ ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] The real reason I like Linux
On Mar 19, 2020, tom wrote: > On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 21:29:51 -0400 > Dan Purgert wrote: > > > > What, then, is so bad about PCI? Or hell, even ISA? > > > > Sure, it's super-limiting in terms of what you can buy off the shelf > > -- but then again, so was the "compatible with Arduino(tm)" market > > 5-10 years ago (and now look at that mess!) > > > > I guess what I'm trying to ask is what would be so bad about a "RISC-V > > Hobby Linux Machine(tm)" only offering these "older" peripheral > > connectivity interfaces in interests of being inexpensive and also > > preserving end-user freedom? > > > > Or ... maybe I'm just a bit crazier than I thought. > > > > Nothing wrong with that in of itself, it's just a bit odd to pair a > RISCV cpu with only slow peripherals. Now there are RISCV > microcontrollers you can buy that don't have an MMU so you can't run > Linux on them, and they have all the IO you'd come to expect on a > microcontroller, however if you want to run Linux or some other similar > multitasking OS like NetBSD it probably makes a lot more sense to > choose something aarch64 based purely do to how good and mature > aarch64's IO capabilities are. Either I'm just horrific at asking (good) questions; or there's something here that you're saying that I simply don't understand. > [...] > But back to your question why not RISCV with slow IO. That's like of > like pairing a Ferrari with a horse trailer. There are much better > options out there for pulling horse trailers than sports cars. Sure, but if all you have is the Ferrari, and the trailer needs to get pulled... -- |_|O|_| |_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert |O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5 4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281 signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] The real reason I like Linux
On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 21:29:51 -0400
Dan Purgert wrote:
> On Mar 16, 2020, tom wrote:
> > On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 08:38:04 -0400
> > Dan Purgert wrote:
> >
> > > On Mar 15, 2020, tom wrote:
> > > > [...] The biggest technical problem is the
> > > > lack of ASIC northbridge, or rather something to interface the
> > > > CPU to an PCIE bus. Currently the best thing available you can
> > > > get is an FPGA and it is a severe bandwidth bottleneck. It's
> > > > also super expensive getting an FPGA that beefy enough. I don't
> > > > see RISCV going anywhere until this is solved except
> > > > microcontroller applications.
> > > >
> > > > The second problem is patents that prevent RISCV developers from
> > > > implementing a lot of popular specs and standards. Just as an
> > > > example look at the licensing cost of implementing HDMI vs
> > > > DisplayPort.
> > >
> > > On the one hand, I understand why a "large market audience" device
> > > would need HDMI or DisplayPort or the newest whizbang 256K DNA
> > > ("Direct Neural Attachment") adapter is ... but why does that
> > > need to be on a small-market / hobby computer?
> > >
> > > I can only speak for myself, but a reasonably open PC at the $400
> > > mark would certainly be competitive to dell or hp; even if it were
> > > "limited" in the peripheral interconnect area (assuming, of
> > > course, the motherboard's peripheral layout were well documented
> > > and people were encouraged to make stuff -- see arduino or rpi
> > > expansion boards )
> > >
> >
> > generally you want to be able to attach a video card or high
> > performance disk controller to a PCIE slot. you /can/ do these
> > things with an FPGA but I wouldn't call it very reliable. You do
> > too many things or send too much data over the bus it exceeds the
> > bandwidth and the system locks up needing a reset.
>
> I think I wasn't clear enough then. For the sake of discussion, let's
> say PCIe is off the table.
>
> What, then, is so bad about PCI? Or hell, even ISA?
>
> Sure, it's super-limiting in terms of what you can buy off the shelf
> -- but then again, so was the "compatible with Arduino(tm)" market
> 5-10 years ago (and now look at that mess!)
>
> I guess what I'm trying to ask is what would be so bad about a "RISC-V
> Hobby Linux Machine(tm)" only offering these "older" peripheral
> connectivity interfaces in interests of being inexpensive and also
> preserving end-user freedom?
>
> Or ... maybe I'm just a bit crazier than I thought.
>
Nothing wrong with that in of itself, it's just a bit odd to pair a
RISCV cpu with only slow peripherals. Now there are RISCV
microcontrollers you can buy that don't have an MMU so you can't run
Linux on them, and they have all the IO you'd come to expect on a
microcontroller, however if you want to run Linux or some other similar
multitasking OS like NetBSD it probably makes a lot more sense to
choose something aarch64 based purely do to how good and mature
aarch64's IO capabilities are.
There is a lot more out there for aarch64 Linux than just the raspberry
Pi computers. Look at Pine64, Beaglebones, and go up further to things
like the Ampere Emag. My personal fav is the RK3399 cpu. very good
all-rounder, lots of IO and hardware offload.
But back to your question why not RISCV with slow IO. That's like of
like pairing a Ferrari with a horse trailer. There are much better
options out there for pulling horse trailers than sports cars.
--
_
/ Most people exhibit what political \
| scientists call "the conservatism of|
| the peasantry." Don't lose what you've |
| got. Don't change. Don't take a chance, |
| because you might end up starving to|
| death. Play it safe. Buy just as much |
| as you need. Don't waste time. |
| |
| When we think about risk, human beings |
| and corporations realize in their heads |
| that risks are necessary to grow, to|
| survive. But when it comes down to |
| keeping good people when the crunch |
| comes, or investing money in something |
| untried, only the brave reach deep into |
| their pockets and play the game as it |
| must be played. |
| |
| - David Lammers, "Yakitori", Electronic |
\ Engineering Times, January 18, 1988 /
-
\
\
/\ /\
//\\_//\\
\_ _// /
/ * * \/^^^]
\_\O/_/[ ]
/ \_[ /
\ \_ / /
[ [ / \/ _/
_[ [ \ /_/
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] The real reason I like Linux
On Mar 17, 2020, terryc wrote: > On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 21:29:51 -0400 > Dan Purgert wrote: > > > I guess what I'm trying to ask is what would be so bad about a "RISC-V > > Hobby Linux Machine(tm)" only offering these "older" peripheral > > connectivity interfaces in interests of being inexpensive and also > > preserving end-user freedom? > > > > Or ... maybe I'm just a bit crazier than I thought. > > Probably . > The question is exactly what peripherals were you thinking on running > off it? Some examples from here; I think you may have misinterpreted "older" in this context. > > My PIO NEC Pinwriter printers, which are very nice for textt and basic > graphic output, suffer from lack of ribbons because the driver foam in > the ribbon cartridges have dis-intergrated with age. > > My PIO/SIO Gestetner Canon SX2 laser printer has flat rollers. > > I shudder to think what the condition of my QIC (PIO) & DAT tapes (SCSI > is like. It is bad enough that the DLT-IV drives are both cactus and > will cost more to repair than purchasing a new LTO-6 drive. Yeah, you're definitely thinking significantly older than I am here. What about say limiting ourselves to "PCI"? Just taking a quick spin through newegg, it appears that basically the only unavailable item is a WLAN adapter. Hard drives -> SATA150 or PATA(!!) Ethernet -> 10/100/1000 USB -> 2.0 Graphics -> OK, this might be a nonstarter > [...] > So, even if it was built, there is probably going to be negligible > demand for it for that reason. To be fair, even if it had the newest of the new, demand for a RISC-V box will be negligible when compared to Dell or HP ... -- |_|O|_| |_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert |O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5 4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281 signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] The real reason I like Linux
On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 21:29:51 -0400 Dan Purgert wrote: > I guess what I'm trying to ask is what would be so bad about a "RISC-V > Hobby Linux Machine(tm)" only offering these "older" peripheral > connectivity interfaces in interests of being inexpensive and also > preserving end-user freedom? > > Or ... maybe I'm just a bit crazier than I thought. Probably . The question is exactly what peripherals were you thinking on running off it? Some examples from here; My PIO NEC Pinwriter printers, which are very nice for textt and basic graphic output, suffer from lack of ribbons because the driver foam in the ribbon cartridges have dis-intergrated with age. My PIO/SIO Gestetner Canon SX2 laser printer has flat rollers. I shudder to think what the condition of my QIC (PIO) & DAT tapes (SCSI is like. It is bad enough that the DLT-IV drives are both cactus and will cost more to repair than purchasing a new LTO-6 drive. There is probably other stuff buried away waiting for the next major clean out. The real problem with old stuff is that if it doesn't work then it is usually isn't economic to repair and that the newer stuff is so much better and cheaper. This was brought home when someone gifted me an Intergraph 5RU Quad Zeon system and two similar sized external hard disk boxen holding 12 FW scsi seagate barracutta hard drives. Very nice kit, until I costed the price of the needed two FW scsi cables to join both boxen to the CPU boxen. It was far cheaper to buy double the hard disk capacity in new SATA drives. So, even if it was built, there is probably going to be negligible demand for it for that reason. Having started my "IT" career when it was called EDP, I am all for alternative hardware and for this reason have only purchased AMD kit(for better or worse)for a decade, so I'd gladly welcome another alternative HW system, but RISC(IBM) and very wary. ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] The real reason I like Linux
On Mar 16, 2020, tom wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 08:38:04 -0400
> Dan Purgert wrote:
>
> > On Mar 15, 2020, tom wrote:
> > > [...] The biggest technical problem is the
> > > lack of ASIC northbridge, or rather something to interface the CPU
> > > to an PCIE bus. Currently the best thing available you can get is
> > > an FPGA and it is a severe bandwidth bottleneck. It's also super
> > > expensive getting an FPGA that beefy enough. I don't see RISCV
> > > going anywhere until this is solved except microcontroller
> > > applications.
> > >
> > > The second problem is patents that prevent RISCV developers from
> > > implementing a lot of popular specs and standards. Just as an
> > > example look at the licensing cost of implementing HDMI vs
> > > DisplayPort.
> >
> > On the one hand, I understand why a "large market audience" device
> > would need HDMI or DisplayPort or the newest whizbang 256K DNA
> > ("Direct Neural Attachment") adapter is ... but why does that need to
> > be on a small-market / hobby computer?
> >
> > I can only speak for myself, but a reasonably open PC at the $400 mark
> > would certainly be competitive to dell or hp; even if it were
> > "limited" in the peripheral interconnect area (assuming, of course,
> > the motherboard's peripheral layout were well documented and people
> > were encouraged to make stuff -- see arduino or rpi expansion boards )
> >
>
> generally you want to be able to attach a video card or high
> performance disk controller to a PCIE slot. you /can/ do these things
> with an FPGA but I wouldn't call it very reliable. You do too many
> things or send too much data over the bus it exceeds the bandwidth and
> the system locks up needing a reset.
I think I wasn't clear enough then. For the sake of discussion, let's
say PCIe is off the table.
What, then, is so bad about PCI? Or hell, even ISA?
Sure, it's super-limiting in terms of what you can buy off the shelf --
but then again, so was the "compatible with Arduino(tm)" market 5-10
years ago (and now look at that mess!)
I guess what I'm trying to ask is what would be so bad about a "RISC-V
Hobby Linux Machine(tm)" only offering these "older" peripheral
connectivity interfaces in interests of being inexpensive and also
preserving end-user freedom?
Or ... maybe I'm just a bit crazier than I thought.
--
|_|O|_|
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5 4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] The real reason I like Linux
On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 08:38:04 -0400
Dan Purgert wrote:
> On Mar 15, 2020, tom wrote:
> > [...] The biggest technical problem is the
> > lack of ASIC northbridge, or rather something to interface the CPU
> > to an PCIE bus. Currently the best thing available you can get is
> > an FPGA and it is a severe bandwidth bottleneck. It's also super
> > expensive getting an FPGA that beefy enough. I don't see RISCV
> > going anywhere until this is solved except microcontroller
> > applications.
> >
> > The second problem is patents that prevent RISCV developers from
> > implementing a lot of popular specs and standards. Just as an
> > example look at the licensing cost of implementing HDMI vs
> > DisplayPort.
>
> On the one hand, I understand why a "large market audience" device
> would need HDMI or DisplayPort or the newest whizbang 256K DNA
> ("Direct Neural Attachment") adapter is ... but why does that need to
> be on a small-market / hobby computer?
>
> I can only speak for myself, but a reasonably open PC at the $400 mark
> would certainly be competitive to dell or hp; even if it were
> "limited" in the peripheral interconnect area (assuming, of course,
> the motherboard's peripheral layout were well documented and people
> were encouraged to make stuff -- see arduino or rpi expansion boards )
>
generally you want to be able to attach a video card or high
performance disk controller to a PCIE slot. you /can/ do these things
with an FPGA but I wouldn't call it very reliable. You do too many
things or send too much data over the bus it exceeds the bandwidth and
the system locks up needing a reset.
--
/ Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes? \
||
\ [Who guards the Guardians?]/
\
\
/\ /\
//\\_//\\
\_ _// /
/ * * \/^^^]
\_\O/_/[ ]
/ \_[ /
\ \_ / /
[ [ / \/ _/
_[ [ \ /_/
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] The real reason I like Linux
On Mar 15, 2020, tom wrote:
> [...] The biggest technical problem is the
> lack of ASIC northbridge, or rather something to interface the CPU to
> an PCIE bus. Currently the best thing available you can get is an FPGA
> and it is a severe bandwidth bottleneck. It's also super expensive
> getting an FPGA that beefy enough. I don't see RISCV going anywhere
> until this is solved except microcontroller applications.
>
> The second problem is patents that prevent RISCV developers from
> implementing a lot of popular specs and standards. Just as an example
> look at the licensing cost of implementing HDMI vs DisplayPort.
On the one hand, I understand why a "large market audience" device would
need HDMI or DisplayPort or the newest whizbang 256K DNA ("Direct Neural
Attachment") adapter is ... but why does that need to be on a
small-market / hobby computer?
I can only speak for myself, but a reasonably open PC at the $400 mark
would certainly be competitive to dell or hp; even if it were "limited"
in the peripheral interconnect area (assuming, of course, the
motherboard's peripheral layout were well documented and people were
encouraged to make stuff -- see arduino or rpi expansion boards )
--
|_|O|_|
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5 4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] The real reason I like Linux
On Mar 14, 2020, Mark Rousell wrote: > I am not opposing your central message in any way, but... > > On 13/03/2020 02:59, Steve Litt wrote: > > involves programming, and most people can't > > do that. > > > > Oh really? 12 lines of code and they can't do it (or have a friend help > > do it)? > > Really. There is no way on earth that the average computer user could > even come close to writing a program or script and this applies to most > of their friends too. I've never thought of myself as much more than "average" (especially considering what some of you lot come up with). But then again, maybe my view of "average" is skewed significantly by the fact that I try to follow what the "above average" are doing. > [...] > It strikes me that back when I first got into computers (the early 80s), > there was a sense of optimism that the rapid growth of widely affordable > technology would result in a new golden era of technical literacy. Oh > dear, how naive. Or perhaps it has happened, just not in the way it was imagined. I mean, I see young kids getting on with their mom's $x00 iMoron device without anyone thinking anything of it. I remember thinking it was a super great privilege to be able to hold the TV remote without people freaking out ... And a pox on all those same parents who are looking down on me for giving my kids an etch-a-sketch and dead trees. (Aside, I can't wait til the older is able to understand basic logic so I can pull out the various 74HCxx logic chips and some buttons and go to town). > > Instead, the techies, geeks and entrepreneurs made technology *easier*. > [...] > Thus, the average user (even the average Linux user, I suspect) is not > going to be scripting stuff any time soon (other than maybe by typing in > stuff they Googled). I don't entirely disagree, but I think the problem is somewhat more nuanced. Before google (or the web in general), what would you have done if you ran into trouble? Probably followed some set of instructions from a friend or colleague (or if you were "on the Internet" at the time, maybe Usenet or a mailing list, I guess). My point is, people have to start somewhere ... -- |_|O|_| |_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert |O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5 4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281 signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] The real reason I like Linux
On Sun, 15 Mar 2020 17:20:51 -0400 Hendrik Boom wrote: > On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 01:20:24PM -0700, tom wrote: > > > > But this may be a stop-gap if you /really/ need to get an X86 > > machine you already have running. My advice is to stop buying X86 > > in the future and invest in other arches. > > > Like what the libre-risv / libre-soc project is working on > ( currently at https://libre-riscv.org ). But that won't be ready > for a while. > > Also https://www.crowdsupply.com/libre-risc-v/m-class > > They started planning on a RISC-V processor, but the seem to be > moving to a POWER processor for technical licencing reasons. > > -- hendrik > ___ > Dng mailing list > Dng@lists.dyne.org > https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng I've actually used one of the first RISCV ASIC cpus. The Sifive Hifive. It ran Debian just fine and I even connected it to a network and played some multiplayer video games on my laptop vs the RISCV machine clocked at 1Ghz. Compilers fly on RISCV. I do think RISCV is the future, however there's a big problem with RISCV and it's a mixture of political and technical problems. The biggest technical problem is the lack of ASIC northbridge, or rather something to interface the CPU to an PCIE bus. Currently the best thing available you can get is an FPGA and it is a severe bandwidth bottleneck. It's also super expensive getting an FPGA that beefy enough. I don't see RISCV going anywhere until this is solved except microcontroller applications. The second problem is patents that prevent RISCV developers from implementing a lot of popular specs and standards. Just as an example look at the licensing cost of implementing HDMI vs DisplayPort. At least that is how I understand the situation to be, but there are probably more knowledgeable RISCV experts than me -- _ / An elderly couple were flying to their \ | Caribbean hideaway on a chartered plane | | when a terrible storm forced them to| | land on an uninhabited island. When | | several days passed without rescue, the | | couple and their pilot sank into a | | despondent silence. Finally, the woman | | asked her husband if he had made his| | usual pledge to the United Way | | Campaign. | | | | "We're running out of food and water| | and you ask *that*?" her husband| | barked. "If you really need to know, I | | not only pledged a half million but | | I've already paid them half of it." | | | | "You owe the U.W.C. a *quarter | | million*?" the woman exclaimed | | euphorically. "Don't worry, Harry, | \ they'll find us! They'll find us!" / - \ \ /\ /\ //\\_//\\ \_ _// / / * * \/^^^] \_\O/_/[ ] / \_[ / \ \_ / / [ [ / \/ _/ _[ [ \ /_/ ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] The real reason I like Linux
On Sun, 15 Mar 2020 13:20:24 -0700 tom wrote: > My advice is to stop buying X86 in the future and invest in other > arches. I love that virtualization has come so far that I don't have to care what I run my stuff on. ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] The real reason I like Linux
On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 01:20:24PM -0700, tom wrote: > > But this may be a stop-gap if you /really/ need to get an X86 machine > you already have running. My advice is to stop buying X86 in the future > and invest in other arches. Like what the libre-risv / libre-soc project is working on ( currently at https://libre-riscv.org ). But that won't be ready for a while. Also https://www.crowdsupply.com/libre-risc-v/m-class They started planning on a RISC-V processor, but the seem to be moving to a POWER processor for technical licencing reasons. -- hendrik ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] The real reason I like Linux
On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 06:05:49 +1100 Andrew McGlashan via Dng wrote: > Actually, we've got more to fear with hardware [and the lower level > firmware / EFI / SecureBoot / IME / vPro and other crap] these days > whether we avoid Winblows or not. > > The Intel and AMD flaws, Intel Management Engine (IME), vPro > capabilities and all of that crap; how can we trust our computers? > Those run below the OS level and can see everything that the OS does > and it isn't vice/versa. > > There are some outfits that go out of their way to give you back > freedoms that you should not have lost; including System76 for one, > disabling IME as much as is possible and using Coreboot. There have > been other projects in the past, but some with very, very old pre > Intel Core hardware. Almost every computer sold since the early > Intel Core Duo CPUs have had serious flaws and components/systems > that significantly lessen your freedoms and invades your privacy at > the same time -- if they don't do that, they sure can if they want to. > > Even if you bought almost any new computer these days and ran an OS > of your own making; it will still include all the Intel Management > and/or other crap. > > The latest round of flaws from Intel make it so that only the very > latest processors are immune to serious problems relating to the lack > of security of IME system keys; meaning that bad code could get on to > the machines whilst masquerading as valid, secure and signed "Intel" > code (whether you trust Intel or not). Even having fixed this > particular flaw, assuming they have, then you've still got to trust > Intel. Well, if freedom is what your after and then I assume you are only using software you have the source code to. If that's the case then there is really no reason to use the X86 arch. Most people are only stuck to the X86 arch because they need to run Windows or run some windows binary. When you have the source just run it through a cross-compiler like GCC and target whatever arch you want to use. On the mobility side we have the excellent and extremely power efficient aarch64 cpus like the RK3399. And on the workstation side we have the POWER9 cpus like the ones from IBM. http://opensource.rock-chips.com/wiki_RK3399 https://www.theobroma-systems.com/som-product/rk3399-q7/ https://www.theobroma-systems.com/evaluationkit/haikou-q7-dev-kit/ (atx form factor motherboard for aarch64 with PCIE and sata) https://www.raptorcs.com/TALOSII/ https://www.raptorcs.com/content/TL2B01/intro.html https://git.raptorcs.com/git/ Regarding cleaning out the intel backdoors from older hardware, Generation 2 (Core2) cpus can have the ME blob completely removed from them will no ill effects. Generations 3 and up to and including 6 (Skylake) You can 'neuter' the backdoor but not fully remove it. You do this by removing every module except the ones that are now required to start the main cores (like BUP for example) and setting the undocumented 'HAP' bit which was found to be sit on dell machines going to the US government. https://github.com/corna/me_cleaner Thankfully most X86 boards nowdays are not rolling their own BIOS firmware and instead just modifying some template AmiBIOS licensees them so you don't have to do a whole lot of reverse engineering to do this, however do still note that X86 cpus are like swiss cheese when it comes to security and correctness and you're still going to have all those hardware vulns like meltdown,spectre,l1tf,mds,spectre_v2, and the list just keeps on growing and growing. But this may be a stop-gap if you /really/ need to get an X86 machine you already have running. My advice is to stop buying X86 in the future and invest in other arches. -- / All generalizations are false, \ | including this one.| || \ -- Mark Twain / \ \ /\ /\ //\\_//\\ \_ _// / / * * \/^^^] \_\O/_/[ ] / \_[ / \ \_ / / [ [ / \/ _/ _[ [ \ /_/ ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] The real reason I like Linux
Hi, On 16/3/20 5:51 am, Andrew McGlashan via Dng wrote: > On 13/3/20 1:59 pm, Steve Litt wrote: >> It's called POSIX. With POSIX, I always have shellscripts, AWK and sort >> ready to do my work for me. With POSIX, I can pipe a stdout into the >> next stdin. With POSIX, I can plug in anything conforming to POSIX, >> such as dmenu, a genius of a program that makes many hard user >> interface situations simple. > > POSIX is everywhere (including in Gates and Jobs machines), it's not the > domain of only *nix like operating systems at all. > > Most things I can do in Linux, I can also do in Winblows .. but I choose to > avoid Winblows for other reasons. > > GNU tools are very important, I've ran GNUWin32 tools on Winblows forever. Actually, we've got more to fear with hardware [and the lower level firmware / EFI / SecureBoot / IME / vPro and other crap] these days whether we avoid Winblows or not. The Intel and AMD flaws, Intel Management Engine (IME), vPro capabilities and all of that crap; how can we trust our computers? Those run below the OS level and can see everything that the OS does and it isn't vice/versa. There are some outfits that go out of their way to give you back freedoms that you should not have lost; including System76 for one, disabling IME as much as is possible and using Coreboot. There have been other projects in the past, but some with very, very old pre Intel Core hardware. Almost every computer sold since the early Intel Core Duo CPUs have had serious flaws and components/systems that significantly lessen your freedoms and invades your privacy at the same time -- if they don't do that, they sure can if they want to. Even if you bought almost any new computer these days and ran an OS of your own making; it will still include all the Intel Management and/or other crap. The latest round of flaws from Intel make it so that only the very latest processors are immune to serious problems relating to the lack of security of IME system keys; meaning that bad code could get on to the machines whilst masquerading as valid, secure and signed "Intel" code (whether you trust Intel or not). Even having fixed this particular flaw, assuming they have, then you've still got to trust Intel. Cheers A. ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] The real reason I like Linux
Hi, On 13/3/20 1:59 pm, Steve Litt wrote: > It's called POSIX. With POSIX, I always have shellscripts, AWK and sort > ready to do my work for me. With POSIX, I can pipe a stdout into the > next stdin. With POSIX, I can plug in anything conforming to POSIX, > such as dmenu, a genius of a program that makes many hard user > interface situations simple. POSIX is everywhere (including in Gates and Jobs machines), it's not the domain of only *nix like operating systems at all. Most things I can do in Linux, I can also do in Winblows .. but I choose to avoid Winblows for other reasons. GNU tools are very important, I've ran GNUWin32 tools on Winblows forever. Cheers A. ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] The real reason I like Linux
On Sat, 14 Mar 2020 14:51:51 +0100 aitor wrote: > Hi, > > On 13/3/20 4:24, onefang wrote: > > After implementing some of their protocols, I started calling > > FreeDesktop.Org FatDesktop.Obscenities. > After reading some comments on this thread, i decided to develop also > another interface of simple-netaid without X-Windows. > And I started it this morning using the CDK (Curses Development Kit), > based on ncurses: > > https://tldp.org/HOWTO/NCURSES-Programming-HOWTO/ > > For now, there will be the following packages of simple-netaid: > > - libnetaid (the shared library). > > - simple-netaid-cdk (using ncurses). > > - simple-netaid-gtk (using gtk2, and maybe also gtk3). > > I wonder if i should also work on another interface developed in > qt5... > > What do you think about? All of these are good ideas, but if it were me, I'd prioritize simple-netaid-dmenu, in which all from-list selection and all user input is done via dmenu. Gtk2, Gtk3, qt5, and ncurses are all fairly big libraries. Dmenu is tiny and depends only on X, for the simplicity lovers among us. Also, simple-netaid-dmenu would be best for the keyboard adept. If you do this, I'd suggest you make the typeface, fontsize, and colors configurable, and default the typeface to Ubuntu Mono Bold, which seems ubiquitous. Simple-netaid-dmenu wouldn't be pretty, but would be simple and lightning fast for the keyboard-adept. Naturally, I'll help test it. SteveT Steve Litt March 2020 featured book: Troubleshooting: Why Bother? http://www.troubleshooters.com/twb ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] The real reason I like Linux
On Sat, 14 Mar 2020 15:08:37 + Mark Rousell wrote: > I am not opposing your central message in any way, but... > > On 13/03/2020 02:59, Steve Litt wrote: > > involves programming, and most people can't > > do that. > > > > Oh really? 12 lines of code and they can't do it (or have a friend > > help do it)? > > Really. There is no way on earth that the average computer user could > even come close to writing a program or script and this applies to > most of their friends too. True, but it doesn't have to be. More later. > > Some people might be able to use a macro recorder or a graphical tool > that allows them to assemble functional blocks to create a script, but > even that much would be too much for most end users in my experience. > End users want to use, to consume. Creating/programming is not in > their mindset. Well of course the average person wants to take, take, take. And beyond that, the average person has been *trained* to be stupid. More later... > > > It strikes me that back when I first got into computers (the early > 80s), there was a sense of optimism that the rapid growth of widely > affordable technology would result in a new golden era of technical > literacy. Oh dear, how naive. Not naive at all. In 1987 I worked at a large law firm, and every legal secretary could deal with the command line, and quite a few could write WordPerfect macros. But Laissez faire capitalists had other ideas. More later... > Instead, the techies, geeks and entrepreneurs made technology > *easier*. We made it so that it was easier for end users to consume, > to use what was offered to them. There was no need for the > non-technical end users to learn anything. It all just works. Or, if > it doesn't work, they throw it away and try something else. And so > that golden age of technical literacy has never really arrived. It arrived alright, during the MS-DOS era. But Mr. Jobs and Mr. Gates had other ideas. If they could convince computer users they were stupid and helpless, then Jobs and Gates could sell their gigantic albatross OSes and the hardware manufacturers could sell their gigantic albatross computers. They had the money, they forced the change, and the human race got dumber. Did you know that circa 1985 Osborne CPM computers had a hierarchical menu interface? WordPerfect offered a very nice hierarchical menu interface. This was pretty much the same as the program-running interfaces of winXP, Gnome2, KDE2 etc. Heck, I personally made a hierarchical menu program in about 1992 that worked just fine with DOS. Mousing and "we do it all for you" wasn't necessary then, and it isn't necessary now. Today there's a program called dmenu, that instantly lists every executable on the path, and narrows the list with each keystroke. Typically it takes 3 or 4 keystrokes to run the executable of your choice. Even a hunt and peck keyboardist can run programs pretty quickly. The point is this: Gnome3 and its ilk aren't needed to give an "average user" an easy way to work his computer. Windows, AppleOS, and FreeDesktopWare are a deliberate marketing to users to convince them they're too stupid to use anything but, respectively, Microsoft, Apple and Redhat. Drag-n-drop is nice. But the cost, in complexity, is too high. And this other basura, these "we know what you want" interfaces, are worse than useless, unless you're a stockholder in Microsoft, Apple or Redhat. > What > we have now is billions of consumers and, proportionately speaking, > fewer and fewer people who actually know how it all works. > > Thus, the average user (even the average Linux user, I suspect) is not > going to be scripting stuff any time soon (other than maybe by typing > in stuff they Googled). Of course not. They've been given an artificial mental block. Jobs, Gates and Poettering have convinced them they're too stupid to write a batch file. But that's nothing intrinsic to humanity, that's very successful but destructive marketing. And later in this thread somebody makes an important point: Those who are really too stupid to learn how to pick a program from a menu, or create a simple 12 line shellscript, should be allowed to migrate to Apple or Microsoft, so that those of us in Linux land with over-80 IQs can make our computers run the way we want, without interference from Gates, Jobs, Poettering, Redhat, FreeDesktop and the usual suspects. Luckily, this is just what Devuan is doing. SteveT Steve Litt March 2020 featured book: Troubleshooting: Why Bother? http://www.troubleshooters.com/twb ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] The real reason I like Linux
On 3/15/20 9:35 AM, Dr. Nikolaus Klepp wrote: > Anno domini 2020 Sat, 14 Mar 23:54:07 -0700 > tom scripsit: >> On Sat, 14 Mar 2020 15:08:37 + >> Mark Rousell wrote: >> >>> I am not opposing your central message in any way, but... >>> >>> On 13/03/2020 02:59, Steve Litt wrote: involves programming, and most people can't do that. Oh really? 12 lines of code and they can't do it (or have a friend help do it)? >>> >>> Really. There is no way on earth that the average computer user could >>> even come close to writing a program or script and this applies to >>> most of their friends too. >>> >>> Some people might be able to use a macro recorder or a graphical tool >>> that allows them to assemble functional blocks to create a script, but >>> even that much would be too much for most end users in my experience. >>> End users want to use, to consume. Creating/programming is not in >>> their mindset. >>> >>> >>> It strikes me that back when I first got into computers (the early >>> 80s), there was a sense of optimism that the rapid growth of widely >>> affordable technology would result in a new golden era of technical >>> literacy. Oh dear, how naive. >>> >>> Instead, the techies, geeks and entrepreneurs made technology >>> *easier*. We made it so that it was easier for end users to consume, >>> to use what was offered to them. There was no need for the >>> non-technical end users to learn anything. It all just works. Or, if >>> it doesn't work, they throw it away and try something else. And so >>> that golden age of technical literacy has never really arrived. What >>> we have now is billions of consumers and, proportionately speaking, >>> fewer and fewer people who actually know how it all works. >>> >>> Thus, the average user (even the average Linux user, I suspect) is not >>> going to be scripting stuff any time soon (other than maybe by typing >>> in stuff they Googled). >>> >> >> I strongly feel like this kind of user should stay away from Linux and >> just use Windows. When those kind of users displace the original >> user-base of literate people they start making the system as a whole >> worse for the core community who built the thing in the first place. >> > > Errr this is what just happend in the last decade(s), peaking in systemd > and gnome3. > users are not to blame. devs/sysadms wanted linux to prevail on desktop/compete with windoze, and those are the results/accomplishments so far. (= systemd, gafam leading opensource world, more m$ clones and wsl).. p.s. elitism doesn't really help, in either side... signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] The real reason I like Linux
Anno domini 2020 Sat, 14 Mar 23:54:07 -0700 tom scripsit: > On Sat, 14 Mar 2020 15:08:37 + > Mark Rousell wrote: > > > I am not opposing your central message in any way, but... > > > > On 13/03/2020 02:59, Steve Litt wrote: > > > involves programming, and most people can't > > > do that. > > > > > > Oh really? 12 lines of code and they can't do it (or have a friend > > > help do it)? > > > > Really. There is no way on earth that the average computer user could > > even come close to writing a program or script and this applies to > > most of their friends too. > > > > Some people might be able to use a macro recorder or a graphical tool > > that allows them to assemble functional blocks to create a script, but > > even that much would be too much for most end users in my experience. > > End users want to use, to consume. Creating/programming is not in > > their mindset. > > > > > > It strikes me that back when I first got into computers (the early > > 80s), there was a sense of optimism that the rapid growth of widely > > affordable technology would result in a new golden era of technical > > literacy. Oh dear, how naive. > > > > Instead, the techies, geeks and entrepreneurs made technology > > *easier*. We made it so that it was easier for end users to consume, > > to use what was offered to them. There was no need for the > > non-technical end users to learn anything. It all just works. Or, if > > it doesn't work, they throw it away and try something else. And so > > that golden age of technical literacy has never really arrived. What > > we have now is billions of consumers and, proportionately speaking, > > fewer and fewer people who actually know how it all works. > > > > Thus, the average user (even the average Linux user, I suspect) is not > > going to be scripting stuff any time soon (other than maybe by typing > > in stuff they Googled). > > > > I strongly feel like this kind of user should stay away from Linux and > just use Windows. When those kind of users displace the original > user-base of literate people they start making the system as a whole > worse for the core community who built the thing in the first place. > Errr this is what just happend in the last decade(s), peaking in systemd and gnome3. -- Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with the NSA, CIA ... ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] The real reason I like Linux
On Sat, 14 Mar 2020 15:08:37 + Mark Rousell wrote: > I am not opposing your central message in any way, but... > > On 13/03/2020 02:59, Steve Litt wrote: > > involves programming, and most people can't > > do that. > > > > Oh really? 12 lines of code and they can't do it (or have a friend > > help do it)? > > Really. There is no way on earth that the average computer user could > even come close to writing a program or script and this applies to > most of their friends too. > > Some people might be able to use a macro recorder or a graphical tool > that allows them to assemble functional blocks to create a script, but > even that much would be too much for most end users in my experience. > End users want to use, to consume. Creating/programming is not in > their mindset. > > > It strikes me that back when I first got into computers (the early > 80s), there was a sense of optimism that the rapid growth of widely > affordable technology would result in a new golden era of technical > literacy. Oh dear, how naive. > > Instead, the techies, geeks and entrepreneurs made technology > *easier*. We made it so that it was easier for end users to consume, > to use what was offered to them. There was no need for the > non-technical end users to learn anything. It all just works. Or, if > it doesn't work, they throw it away and try something else. And so > that golden age of technical literacy has never really arrived. What > we have now is billions of consumers and, proportionately speaking, > fewer and fewer people who actually know how it all works. > > Thus, the average user (even the average Linux user, I suspect) is not > going to be scripting stuff any time soon (other than maybe by typing > in stuff they Googled). > I strongly feel like this kind of user should stay away from Linux and just use Windows. When those kind of users displace the original user-base of literate people they start making the system as a whole worse for the core community who built the thing in the first place. -- ___ / That woman speaks eight languages and \ | can't say "no" in any of them.| | | \ -- Dorothy Parker / --- \ \ /\ /\ //\\_//\\ \_ _// / / * * \/^^^] \_\O/_/[ ] / \_[ / \ \_ / / [ [ / \/ _/ _[ [ \ /_/ ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] The real reason I like Linux
I am not opposing your central message in any way, but... On 13/03/2020 02:59, Steve Litt wrote: > involves programming, and most people can't > do that. > > Oh really? 12 lines of code and they can't do it (or have a friend help > do it)? Really. There is no way on earth that the average computer user could even come close to writing a program or script and this applies to most of their friends too. Some people might be able to use a macro recorder or a graphical tool that allows them to assemble functional blocks to create a script, but even that much would be too much for most end users in my experience. End users want to use, to consume. Creating/programming is not in their mindset. It strikes me that back when I first got into computers (the early 80s), there was a sense of optimism that the rapid growth of widely affordable technology would result in a new golden era of technical literacy. Oh dear, how naive. Instead, the techies, geeks and entrepreneurs made technology *easier*. We made it so that it was easier for end users to consume, to use what was offered to them. There was no need for the non-technical end users to learn anything. It all just works. Or, if it doesn't work, they throw it away and try something else. And so that golden age of technical literacy has never really arrived. What we have now is billions of consumers and, proportionately speaking, fewer and fewer people who actually know how it all works. Thus, the average user (even the average Linux user, I suspect) is not going to be scripting stuff any time soon (other than maybe by typing in stuff they Googled). -- Mark Rousell ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] The real reason I like Linux
Steve Litt writes: [...] > FreeDesktop.Org doesn't like me doing 90 minutes of programming > (and actually Lego(R) block assembly). Their preferred method goes > something like this: > > * Use Gnome. > * Find Gnome software that solves your problem: > - Ask your LUG > - Ask on stackoverflow > - Read every page on FreeDesktop.Org > - Spend a day doing web searches > * Test the found softwares for suitability > - If it fails a requirement, ask around for a fix > - Experiment, experiment, experiment > * Install the necessary softwares > - Adjust your workflow to comply with the softwares > - Weave yourself through and around all the software > requirements An incorrigible optimist, I presume. With Freedoorstop, if Gnome doesn't handle it out of the box, it's not an issue 'legitmate' users ought to be dealing with :->. SCNR. ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] The real reason I like Linux
On Thu, 12 Mar 2020 22:59:28 -0400 Steve Litt wrote: > For me, it's all about POSIX. I immediately understood the UNIX philosophy when I first heard of it; tiny, single-purpose programs which can be stitched together. I agreed with it, but found all the tools incredibly complex mainly because of shit documentation and poor examples. I don't (technically) program, so I started writing all that as I went along. I've grown tired over the years though, preferring the lazy user side of things. I never really did proper programming, but it's very fulfilling to script my own stuff. For example, I don't need a GUI screenshot program when I can summon this with an Openbox hotkey: \sh -c "\ \urxvt -title 'screenshot' -geometry 120x50+0+0 -e \\ \dialog --no-shadow --msgbox 'screenshot' 0 0 ;\\ \scrot --select 'screenshot--%Y-%m-%d_%H:%M:%S--$wx$h.png' --exec '\mv $f /l/live/__ ; \gpicview /l/live/__/$f' \\ " Oh, and since I'm on that and we have some Openbox people.. guess what this does: \sh -c "\ \geany \\ $( \realpath ~/.themes/minimal-spiralofhope/openbox-3/themerc ) \\ $( \realpath ~/.config/openbox/rc.xml ) ;\ \waitpid $! ;\ \openbox --reconfigure ;\ \waitpid $! ;\ \xrefresh \\ " The problem for me is how to share things so they're discoverable. I've got a GitHub repository, but.. that's not exactly connected to search engines (maybe one day to Bing?), especially since I don't really describe every little script in a way that users could type in keywords to discover. ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] The real reason I like Linux
On 2020-03-12 22:59:28, Steve Litt wrote: > Now the guys from FreeDesktop would read this email and wring their > hands: Oh, no, your kludge involves programming, and most people can't > do that. > > Oh really? 12 lines of code and they can't do it (or have a friend help > do it)? FreeDesktop.Org doesn't like me doing 90 minutes of programming > (and actually Lego(R) block assembly). Their preferred method goes > something like this: > > * Use Gnome. > * Find Gnome software that solves your problem: > - Ask your LUG > - Ask on stackoverflow > - Read every page on FreeDesktop.Org > - Spend a day doing web searches > * Test the found softwares for suitability > - If it fails a requirement, ask around for a fix > - Experiment, experiment, experiment > * Install the necessary softwares > - Adjust your workflow to comply with the softwares > - Weave yourself through and around all the software > requirements > > Better yet, with the FreeDesktop.Org way, there's ongoing maintenance, > because every time some library author changes his library, your > FreeDesktop.Org style "solution" breaks and you need to beg for a > special package to fix your problem. > > The FreeDesktop guys are geniuses. They can make specifications that > can turn the most attentive reader into a bowl of jelly. They can > implement sixteen levels of pointers and events and callbacks far > beyond the understanding of mortal man. After implementing some of their protocols, I started calling FreeDesktop.Org FatDesktop.Obscenities. -- A big old stinking pile of genius that no one wants coz there are too many silver coated monkeys in the world. ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
[DNG] The real reason I like Linux
Hi all,
A recent discussion here reminded me why I really like Linux. And then
a couple hours later I had a need...
I have four 8 foot shelving units: Three with seven shelves and one
with eight. Over the years, stuff's just been crammed into them, and
the situation is busting my productivity too much. So I made a diagram
of the four units, lettered A-D, each with shelves 1-7 (or 1-8 for one
of them). And because they're 4 feet wide, each shelf was divided into
l,c, and r (Left, Center, and Right).
As I cleared off shelves and put stuff in their new right places, I
realized those new right places would be forgotten. I needed a list of
shelf locations and the items stored therein. Because I'm the
originator of VimOutliner and feel very at home with tab indented
outlines, I am making the list in VimOutliner.
But there's a problem. There's no quick, practical way I'll be able to
search for the items at a location, or search for the location of an
item. No problem. Two AWK programs: One to write first by location and
to the right list the item, and another to write first by item and
later (thanks to AWK's printf() formatting) a nicely formatted
location. Pipe the output of either into the sort command, and I have a
nice, sorted list.
But geez, I don't want to look through a less session for an item or
location: I want a better interface. No problem, I piped the output of
sort into dmenu, which specializes in narrowing down lists using
keystrokes. Now three or four keystrokes and I can find my item. And
dmenu has a feature where the string you type doesn't even need to be
at the start of the string you're searching for. I could type "ball"
and get ball, baseball, baseball bat, etc.
But I don't want to run a command every time I need to search. No
problem: I'll have a special hotkey for this functionality that uses
either dmenu or my homegrown UMENU2 to bring up the list to narrow down.
Check this out:
==
#!/usr/bin/gawk -We
function ltrim(s) { sub(/^[ \t\r\n]+/, "", s); return s }
function rtrim(s) { sub(/[ \t\r\n]+$/, "", s); return s }
function trim(s) { return rtrim(ltrim(s)); }
/^[^\t]/ {unit = trim($0)}
/^\t[^\t]/ {shelf = trim($0)}
/^\t\t[^\t]/ {side = trim($0)}
/^\t\t\t/ {printf("%-28s||| %s%s%s\n", trim($0),unit,shelf,side)}
==
The preceding is executed by mini-shellscript find_loc.sh, as follows:
==
#!/bin/sh
cat shelf_locs.otl | ./yield_loc.awk | sort | \
dmenu -i -l 20 -fn "Ubuntu Mono:style=bold:size=16" \
-nb yellow -nf blue -sb darkred -sf lightcyan
==
It's called POSIX. With POSIX, I always have shellscripts, AWK and sort
ready to do my work for me. With POSIX, I can pipe a stdout into the
next stdin. With POSIX, I can plug in anything conforming to POSIX,
such as dmenu, a genius of a program that makes many hard user
interface situations simple.
I like Linux because it's POSIX. I could just as easily use OpenBSD,
but I want a works-every-time virtual machine, Docker is nice, Linux
runs a few more programs than OpenBSD, and with Linux I don't have to
deal with Theo and the boys. Hey, they're great guys and highly
skilled, but they're just not my type.
Now the guys from FreeDesktop would read this email and wring their
hands: Oh, no, your kludge involves programming, and most people can't
do that.
Oh really? 12 lines of code and they can't do it (or have a friend help
do it)? FreeDesktop.Org doesn't like me doing 90 minutes of programming
(and actually Lego(R) block assembly). Their preferred method goes
something like this:
* Use Gnome.
* Find Gnome software that solves your problem:
- Ask your LUG
- Ask on stackoverflow
- Read every page on FreeDesktop.Org
- Spend a day doing web searches
* Test the found softwares for suitability
- If it fails a requirement, ask around for a fix
- Experiment, experiment, experiment
* Install the necessary softwares
- Adjust your workflow to comply with the softwares
- Weave yourself through and around all the software
requirements
Better yet, with the FreeDesktop.Org way, there's ongoing maintenance,
because every time some library author changes his library, your
FreeDesktop.Org style "solution" breaks and you need to beg for a
special package to fix your problem.
The FreeDesktop guys are geniuses. They can make specifications that
can turn the most attentive reader into a bowl of jelly. They can
implement sixteen levels of pointers and events and callbacks far
beyond the understanding of mortal man.
But I'll tell you the real geniuses. Thompson. Kernighan. Ritchie. Aho.
They knew you need to solve problems fast, so they made tools enabling
any fool to do just that. No need for event loops with callbacks and
message routing. And they made their tools so t
