low level linux productivety
no.to...@gmail.com
From the beginning I made use of the visual file-manager: mc,
so I didn't have to grovel with the intricacies of mv ...etc.
Because someone gave me the 2009 Debian-Lenny-CD, I made
the mistake of installing it. It's got no mc.
A workaround of copying the single-fd0-mulinux from another
box to use as a chroot, got me to a situation of "/" contains:
<a list of files>, <empty-dir "bin">.
So I want to mv <a list of files> but not the <empty-dir "bin">
to <empty-dir "bin">.
So while I was wasting time failing to do this trivial task, I was
analysing *WHY* I was failing, and how the reasons relate to
human productivety. And I noted:
* the syntax of mv, changes from the 'normal': sec dest; for the
case of the source-dir and target-dir being different -- apparently ?
* searching the absurd mans, is like searching a telephone
directory that is sorted by telephone-number.
If you knew the alphabetic ranking of the option-letter/word,
you wouldn't need to find it ! You are force to read and discard
every thing up to your 'target'. What a waste - unproductive.
* the concept of heirarchical menus allows separation of concern
and gets you to the-one-of-200-possibilities in 3 or 4 steps.
* so, info can be better than man for big-stuff.
* there *ARE* competent users who hate mc and prefere to
work 'blind' ! I think they like to pretend that they are
writing 'instruction notes' to the little man in the box.
----------
If I use 3 VTs: 1. Plan/log of the job; 2. source-dir; 3. target-dir;
instead of mc, which because of the reduced cognitive load,
eliminates the need for a Plan/log file, and collapses VT2,3
into one visual display of the contents of [any] 2 directories;
then
on top of the crap of having to swap between 3 VTs, you
still have the problem of not knowing which VT you're in:
you can't know which VT your in whith out 'going out side
& looking at the door-name'.
So it become as complex/confusion as the above multi-line
sentence.
------------------------
Obviously the problems that I'm describing have been tackled,
and I'm now using kde 3 [from madrak9] which IMO goes abit
over-the-top as a solution. I hate the intrusive pop-ups which
I haven't found out how/if to disable; and I've read that kde 4
is even worse.
CONCLUSION: computing is NOT about computer hardware
& software; it's about the human interface - to make humans
more productive.
I've found a solution, but it's only appreciated if one is aware
of the problem/s.
== Chris Glur.
Aragorn
identifying as no.to...@gmail.com wrote...
> IIRC I've been using linux for several decades.
As explained to you by others already the previous time you posted this
article - not that I see a reason for you to repost it verbatim "as
is", since you received ample answers on your original post - Linux,
the kernel, only exists since 1991. That makes it less than two
decades ago when the very first alpha version of the Linux kernel was
released.
So unless you are privvy to time-traveling technology, that statement is
incorrect. But then again, I suspect you might be somewhat of a
troll...
> From the beginning I made use of the visual file-manager: mc,
> so I didn't have to grovel with the intricacies of mv ...etc.
>
> Because someone gave me the 2009 Debian-Lenny-CD, I made
> the mistake of installing it. It's got no mc.
So the installing of a specific (and quite well-equiped) distribution is
a mistake just because *you* couldn't find the Midnight Commander and
couldn't be bothered with downloading the package from the
repositories?
Are you sure you even want to be using a UNIX-style operating system?
Wouldn't you feel safer on Windows? Just a thought, mind you...
<shakes head>
> A workaround of copying the single-fd0-mulinux from another
> box to use as a chroot, got me to a situation of "/" contains:
> <a list of files>, <empty-dir "bin">.
>
> So I want to mv <a list of files> but not the <empty-dir "bin">
> to <empty-dir "bin">.
>
> So while I was wasting time failing to do this trivial task, I was
> analysing *WHY* I was failing, and how the reasons relate to
> human productivety. And I noted:
>
> * the syntax of mv, changes from the 'normal': sec dest; for the
> case of the source-dir and target-dir being different -- apparently ?
Parser eror. Cannot compute.
> * searching the absurd mans, is like searching a telephone
> directory that is sorted by telephone-number.
> If you knew the alphabetic ranking of the option-letter/word,
> you wouldn't need to find it ! You are force to read and discard
> every thing up to your 'target'. What a waste - unproductive.
man ls
> * the concept of heirarchical menus allows separation of concern
> and gets you to the-one-of-200-possibilities in 3 or 4 steps.
>
> * so, info can be better than man for big-stuff.
Except that you were told the last time that not all /info/ pages are so
clearly organized to let you know where in the documentation that which
you are looking for is to be found.
> * there *ARE* competent users who hate mc and prefere to
> work 'blind' !
There is no "working blind". There are commands for just about
everything, and you can have your shell prompt showing you lots of it
by setting the PS1 variable in your *~/.bashr* - or globally, in
*/etc/bashrc.
> I think they like to pretend that they are
> writing 'instruction notes' to the little man in the box.
Nonsense. UNIX is a logically working system, and it is expected of the
user that he or she makes use of the neurons in their skull to think
logically as well.
> If I use 3 VTs: 1. Plan/log of the job; 2. source-dir; 3. target-dir;
> instead of mc, which because of the reduced cognitive load,
> eliminates the need for a Plan/log file, and collapses VT2,3
> into one visual display of the contents of [any] 2 directories;
> then
> on top of the crap of having to swap between 3 VTs, you
> still have the problem of not knowing which VT you're in:
> you can't know which VT your in whith out 'going out side
> & looking at the door-name'.
man tty
man bash
man screen
(The latter is an alternative approach to using multiple sessions by
grouping them at the same console. It also supports detaching sessions
and reconnecting to them later from the same or a different location.)
> So it become as complex/confusion as the above multi-line
> sentence.
>
> ------------------------
> Obviously the problems that I'm describing have been tackled,
> and I'm now using kde 3 [from madrak9] [...
Mandrake 9 is very old and no longer supported. You are missing out on
a lot of security updates.
> ...] which IMO goes abit over-the-top as a solution. I hate the
> intrusive pop-ups which I haven't found out how/if to disable; [...
I have no idea what you're talking about. If you're talking of
confirmation dialogs, those can be disabled using the KDE Control
Center - /kcontrol/ when started from a terminal emulator window or
via /Alt+F2./
> ...] and I've read that kde 4 is even worse.
Looking at everything you've written so far, I'd say that you are very
quick to judge, and prejudiced to boot. KDE 4.x is still a work in
progress, but it is slowly getting there, and unless you've actually
checked it out for yourself, you can't judge it based upon heresay over
some alleged confirmation dialogs.
> CONCLUSION: computing is NOT about computer hardware
> & software; it's about the human interface - to make humans
> more productive.
Computers are in essence big calculators, and it was only later on that
computers became used for the processing of other information than
formulas and their data. Computers are not intended to do your
thinking for you. They are merely there to help you deal with
information.
"Productivity" is a conveniently vague enough buzzword as it is.
> I've found a solution, but it's only appreciated if one is aware
> of the problem/s.
Going back to Windows?
--
*Aragorn*
(registered GNU/Linux user #223157)
Bit Twister
> IIRC I've been using linux for several decades.
Will everyone please put this troll in their kill file.
He has changed is name from Sidney Lambe to no.top.post.
Sidney Lambe has posted this same troll bait before.
Aragorn
identifying as Bit Twister wrote...
Bit, I will concur that he has posted this drivel before, but are you so
sure that this is Sidney Lambe, alias Alan Connor, alias Tom Newton,
alias Bruce Burhans?
While the subject seems to be a kind of baiting in the same direction,
this guy obviously seems to go the other direction of what "Sid"
normally rants about. This guy seems to insist on having some visual
user interface as opposed to the shell interface, which is quite the
opposite of what "Sid" would rave about.
In all honesty, this guy seems like a troll to me, yes, but I do not
think that this is "Sid". However, if you have any evidence that he
is, then I'm willing to evaluate it. :-)
Sidney Lambe
> IIRC I've been using linux for several decades.
> From the beginning I made use of the visual file-manager: mc,
> so I didn't have to grovel with the intricacies of mv ...etc.
Obviously, "no.top.post" means that information isn't allowed
to reach his brain.
Linux has been around since the early 1990's, which is not
"several decades" to anyone with a 1st grade math education
or better.
As for the "intricacies of mv", I can't believe someone actually
posted such an idiocy. There are very few computer programs
in existence that are simpler than mv. Maybe the one that just
prints "Hello, World".
mc is much more complex, by orders of magnitude. It is easier to
learn to use the shell interface directly.
The truth here is obvious: This is another Windoze-weenie who can
only (sort of) run Linux because of some bloated Windows-clone
GDE like KDE or Gnome, playing the fucking role.
But what does he care? When he realizes he's made a fool of
himself he'll just drop this alias and adopt another.
Like Wannabe-Sys-Admin ;-)
[delete]
Sid
--
Shell Interface Mailing List
screening address: usenet4444
[AT] gmail (dot) com
John Thompson
> IIRC I've been using linux for several decades.
> From the beginning I made use of the visual file-manager: mc,
> so I didn't have to grovel with the intricacies of mv ...etc.
>
> Because someone gave me the 2009 Debian-Lenny-CD, I made
> the mistake of installing it. It's got no mc.
[clip...]
So, why didn't you try "apt-get install mc"?
--
-John (jo...@os2.dhs.org)
Maxwell Lol
> IIRC I've been using linux for several decades.
> From the beginning I made use of the visual file-manager: mc,
> so I didn't have to grovel with the intricacies of mv ...etc.
>
> Because someone gave me the 2009 Debian-Lenny-CD, I made
> the mistake of installing it. It's got no mc.
Troll alert.
(normal people install packages that are missing)
(trolls bitch)