Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: D Newsgroups: comp.misc Subject: Re: fdm, paredit and systemd Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2025 00:09:07 +0100 Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org) Message-ID: <9f05f9e2-c7cd-4d03-0e32-44dc9537e2f0@example.net> References: <67b21894$14$17$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com> <67b4fc88@news.ausics.net> <67b659f8@news.ausics.net> <87mseggwo1.fsf@example.com> <87frk8drdb.fsf@example.com> <2d9b3f1c-c742-e47f-84cf-599e01f9a044@example.net> <87ikp02i0x.fsf@example.com> <87msebw9sa.fsf@example.com> <87a5aau8bz.fsf@example.com> <8a7e56c9-779d-2250-2e9c-6dd67af88570@example.net> <87r03mq9po.fsf_-_@example.com> <2f52e086-7adf-663a-2bd7-0e328bdba87c@example.net> <87a5a7hhbd.fsf@example.com> <1e0008ef-b322-6a14-5842-d1f10eac4b58@example.net> <87h644gz5i.fsf@example.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Injection-Info: i2pn2.org; logging-data="3501573"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org"; posting-account="w/4CleFT0XZ6XfSuRJzIySLIA6ECskkHxKUAYDZM66M"; In-Reply-To: <87h644gz5i.fsf@example.com> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 Xref: csiph.com comp.misc:26840 On Fri, 7 Mar 2025, Salvador Mirzo wrote: >>> Yeah---there's a fine line between incrementing language and sticking >>> with the previous, well-established vocabulary. That's particularly >>> important for hackers because they have an imense amount of vocabulary >>> to manage and great fluency is essential to their day-to-day operations. >> >> Another example from hell for me is powershell. I've never seen such long >> command! Microsoft powershell gurus must really enjoy typing! > > Besides, it's yet another shell. Even if it were really great... Have > you seen Plan9's rc? It's a very neat shell. But it's not Bourne's sh. > It's hard to overcome the inertia of a large body moving at high speed. Never seen. How does it differ from plain old bash? Inertia is a problem. Many young children I think use zsh on Macs, somehow, bash was what I had when I was young, and it stuck. ;) >> Oh believe me... I've had to _fight_ to keep any resemblance of >> teaching basic bash scripting in the linux course. At first students >> hate it, but the brilliant ones later on tell me that they actually >> picked up a lot of linux while bash scripting, instead of if we used >> python or something else. This makes me happy and works as intended! >> ;) > > No shell scripting? Okay---let's investigate a bit how the system > works. ``What's in a name? A rose by any other name would smell as > sweet.'' That's from a teacher I had called Juliet---she was pretty True. I'm currently discussing the course plans for the autumn, I think I have a good chance at sneaking in some good old shell through the backdoor. Keep your fingers crossed! =D >>> In other words, I'd go for depth, not immediate working knowledge. >>> Every system administrator will have to grind through the manuals >>> anyway. Knowing how to start or stop daemons, say, in a particular >>> system would not be terribly useful in a classroom. Of course, we would >>> see how run the commands in whatever system we're using for the >>> illustrations at the black board or at the computer lab, but merely to >>> see things in motion. >> >> I wish we could do that... but the amount of teaching hours and focus >> on the vocation schools make that very difficult. =( > > I know. > > I also think that we shouldn't interfere so much with nature's course. > It's not that we don't care---it's that we respect the group. Let's let > the group follow its ``natural'' course. It's different when we're the > captain; we then steer as we like. True! > You can be the captain > And I'll draw the chart > Sailing into destiny > Closer to the heart > -- Neil Peart, Peter Talbot, 1977 >