[sf-lug] resolver problem

maestro maestro415 at gmail.com
Fri Apr 8 15:23:20 PDT 2016

passing around the popcorn with brewer's yeast shaken on it [:::] ...

friday night main event:



message ends.

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Rick Moen <rick at linuxmafia.com> wrote:

> Quoting Bobbie Sellers (bliss-sf4ever at dslextreme.com):
> > I started using gui tools on the Amiga and my carpal tunnels seem to
> > be fine after about 30 years.  I do get cramps at times in my forearms
> > but believe it to be a side-effect of muscle weakening due to my
> > S.E.I.D.
> I'm delighted to hear that, and wish your fingers all the best.
> I started using GUI tools on 1980s OSes, and outgrew them.
> > >When people ask me to suggest a 'GUI file manager', my cheerful top
> > >recommendation is running bash in an xterm.  ;->
> >
> > If I could type reasonable well I might agree but I cannot so I will
> > not.
> Oh, if you seriously allege that a 'GUI file manager' is a more
> efficient way to do Unix file operations, I'll be glad to do a small
> wager and competition with you.  Michael can be the judge and guy with a
> stopwatch, and we can each specify a few relatively complex operations
> like 'find and delete all files inside a subtree bearing filename
> extension .bak', 'find all files owned by www-data that are
> world-writeable and remove the world-writeable permission', and 'find
> all files inside a subtree containing the text string '2015 income tax'.
> Fastest execution on the majority of operations tested, one of us buys
> the other a cup of coffee at Cafe Enchante.  Sound good?
> I predict I can do those using simple bash operations before you can
> even do more than get started with your 'GUI file manager'.  And both of
> those are very practical, non-contrived file operations that are
> important in the real world.  (If you doubt this, I can detail why.)
> Separately and in addition, unlike file operations with a 'GUI file
> manager', operations conducted using standard Unix tools (bash and
> friends) can be prototyped, edited, debugged, stored, and scripted --
> and will work the same, first time, every time, exactly the same without
> worrying about finger-fumbling.
> But I'm glad you like your 'GUI' thing.  I'm sure it's cute and draws
> pretty pictures, and gives soothing visual feedback.
> > And though it is branded Iceweasel it is still a Firefox with a
> > winter coat.
> Yes.  Is there a point?
> > I rather like it but don't want to go to the problems I would have in
> > setting it up on other distributions.
> As in all matters, I'm delighted you are able to implement your own
> opinions on your own machines.
> > >Not everyone leaps on the insane Firefox upgrade treadmill, Bobbie.
> >
> > No choice in jumping on or off.  And it is Mozilla doing the insane
> > upgrade treadmill.  I just use what the distribution has with a few
> > additions.
> By contrast, I do my best to be in charge of what I use.  I guess each
> of us gets his or her wishes.  Happy ending!
> Is there a point?
> > It seems to be the rationale for a lot of modern GNU/Linux desktops.
> Dotfiles were created a very long time before modern Linux desktops.  I
> just told you the rationale for their creation, based on knowledge of
> Unix history.  You wish to doubt me about that based on what you think
> 'modern GNU/Linux desktops' are doing?  Well, good luck with that.
> _______________________________________________
> sf-lug mailing list
> sf-lug at linuxmafia.com
> http://linuxmafia.com/mailman/listinfo/sf-lug
> Information about SF-LUG is at http://www.sf-lug.org/


*~the quieter you become, the more you are able to hear...*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://linuxmafia.com/pipermail/sf-lug/attachments/20160408/f6db324a/attachment.html>

More information about the sf-lug mailing list