[sf-lug] resolver problem

[maestro]

just thought this kinda timely to quote someone;

"In the Beginning, There Was Command Line."
Neal Stephenson


message ends.
___________________

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 4:14 PM, Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever at dslextreme.com
> wrote:

>
>
> On 04/08/2016 01:54 PM, Rick Moen 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?
>>
>
>         Let make it simpler.  Show up at the Cafe on a meeting date and I
> will
> buy you cup of coffee.
>     I make no claims as to gui efficiency but merely point out that I am
> a rotten typist.
>
>>
>> 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.)
>>
>
>     Oh I am sure you can,  I would not contest the matter.
>
>>
>> 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.
>>
>         Not particularly cute and it gives little visual feedback.
>     You miss the point that the fast I try to type the more mistakes
> I make and I only successfully copied one Commodore 64 program
> from printed BASIC source to another machine.  That was when there
> was an office shop around 9th and Mission.  They had a portable
> Commodore 64 sitting there with the cursor blinking and I took a few
> minutes with the manager's indulgence and typed in a kaleioscope
> program.  It made the machine look more capable than it was in
> reality.
>
>>
>>
>> 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.
>>
>
>         You miss my point,  I was not talking about dot files but about
> user interfaces that hide the structure of the file systems.  Such
> as Unity and a couple of others.
>
>     Unity a distribution by the way was a Mandriva fork but is sort of
> moribund
> at this time so the obfuscatory desktop might as well use the name.
>
>     Bobbie Sellers
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160408/429252a9/attachment.html>