Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #60984 > unrolled thread

Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux

Started byRuben Safir <mrbrklyn@panix.com>
First post2024-11-15 01:31 +0000
Last post2024-11-19 02:46 +0000
Articles 20 on this page of 91 — 17 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Ruben Safir <mrbrklyn@panix.com> - 2024-11-15 01:31 +0000
    Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2024-11-15 21:10 +0000
    Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Phillip Frabott <nntp@fulltermprivacy.com> - 2024-11-15 20:26 -0500
      Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-11-16 10:31 +0100
        Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Phillip Frabott <nntp@fulltermprivacy.com> - 2024-11-16 09:42 -0500
          Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-11-16 22:20 +0100
            Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Phillip Frabott <nntp@fulltermprivacy.com> - 2024-11-17 09:33 -0500
              Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Pancho <Pancho.Jones@proton.me> - 2024-11-17 15:18 +0000
                Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2024-11-17 17:17 +0000
                  Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Pancho <Pancho.Jones@proton.me> - 2024-11-17 17:54 +0000
                  Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-11-17 18:07 +0000
                    Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-11-18 10:11 +0100
                    Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-11-19 08:57 +0100
                      Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-11-19 19:34 +0000
                        Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-11-20 14:50 +0100
                  Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-17 19:36 +0000
                Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-11-17 17:47 +0000
                  Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Pancho <Pancho.Jones@proton.me> - 2024-11-17 18:06 +0000
                    Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-17 19:32 +0000
                Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Phillip Frabott <nntp@fulltermprivacy.com> - 2024-11-17 14:52 -0500
                  Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-11-17 23:06 -0500
              Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-11-18 10:07 +0100
    Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-11-18 00:42 -0500
      Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux G <g@nowhere.invalid> - 2024-11-18 09:46 +0000
        Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-11-19 02:03 -0500
      Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Phillip Frabott <nntp@fulltermprivacy.com> - 2024-11-18 09:36 -0500
        Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-11-18 16:31 +0000
          Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2024-11-19 07:31 -0500
            Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-11-19 14:22 +0000
              Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2024-11-19 19:30 +0000
                Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-19 21:58 +0000
                  Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2024-11-20 00:53 +0000
                    Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-20 01:16 +0000
                      Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2024-11-20 07:47 -0500
                    Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-11-20 10:23 +0000
                      Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2024-11-20 07:48 -0500
                        Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-11-20 12:52 +0000
                          Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-20 23:35 +0000
                      Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2024-11-20 17:54 +0000
                      Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-11-20 19:14 +0000
                      Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-11-20 19:18 +0000
                        Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-11-21 13:45 +0000
                          Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-11-27 01:24 -0500
                            Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-11-27 12:16 +0000
                  Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2024-11-20 07:39 -0500
                    Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2024-11-20 17:54 +0000
                      Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux G <g@nowhere.invalid> - 2024-11-20 18:53 +0000
                        Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-11-20 22:58 +0000
                          Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2024-11-21 07:33 -0500
                      Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-11-20 19:09 +0000
                      Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-20 23:33 +0000
                      Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2024-11-21 07:32 -0500
                        Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2024-11-21 19:18 +0000
                    Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-11-20 19:06 +0000
                      Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-11-20 21:51 +0100
                        Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-11-20 23:12 +0000
                          Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-11-21 09:51 +0100
                    Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2024-11-21 04:31 +0000
                      Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-21 05:23 +0000
                      Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-11-21 05:56 +0000
                        Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2024-11-22 03:53 +0000
                      Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-11-21 09:54 +0100
                        Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-11-21 20:03 +0000
                          Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-11-21 21:39 +0100
                Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-11-20 22:11 +0100
                  Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-11-20 23:04 +0000
                    Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2024-11-21 05:27 +0000
                      Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-11-21 06:01 +0000
                    Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-11-21 09:49 +0100
                      Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2024-11-22 20:30 +0000
                        Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-22 20:51 +0000
                          Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Daniel <me@sc1f1dan.com> - 2024-12-17 06:13 +0000
                            Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Aidan Kehoe <kehoea@parhasard.net> - 2024-12-17 07:14 +0000
                              Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux luxhalitus <luxhalitus@nowhere.nil> - 2024-12-17 11:21 +0000
                    Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-11-21 12:13 +0100
              Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-11-19 19:41 +0000
        Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-18 23:15 +0000
          Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Phillip Frabott <nntp@fulltermprivacy.com> - 2024-11-18 21:39 -0500
            Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-19 02:45 +0000
              Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Phillip Frabott <nntp@fulltermprivacy.com> - 2024-11-18 22:20 -0500
                Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-19 04:59 +0000
                  Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Phillip Frabott <nntp@fulltermprivacy.com> - 2024-11-19 01:19 -0500
                    Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-11-19 10:02 +0100
                      Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-11-19 09:23 +0000
                        Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Pancho <Pancho.Jones@proton.me> - 2024-11-19 10:07 +0000
                          Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-11-19 10:11 +0000
                            Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2024-11-19 19:30 +0000
                              Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-11-20 10:20 +0000
                          Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-11-19 13:07 +0100
                        Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-11-19 13:07 +0100
            Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-19 02:46 +0000

Page 1 of 5  [1] 2 3 4 5  Next page →


#60984 — Re: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux

FromRuben Safir <mrbrklyn@panix.com>
Date2024-11-15 01:31 +0000
SubjectRe: What programs do you make sure are installed on a new Linux
Message-ID<vh68a8$pb6$2@reader1.panix.com>
Jack Strangio  <jackstrangio@yahoo.com> wrote:
> candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> writes:
>> 
>> To be fair, having Linux as your first OS would be very rare.
> 

Who cares.  It is the only OS I have used since 1998 at least.

Everything else I look at sucks.

Programs I install
Openshot
Firefox
Gimp
GVIM
thunderbird
mutt
gcc
make
Perl
Python
gdb
vlc
crossfire-gtk
gnuplot
dia
inkscape
scribus
xcalc
oclock
windowmaker
X11
openrc
hexchat
popcorntime
transmission
open-nusismat
make
rsync
ssh!!

at minimum
> Hey, look, guys! I'm a rarity!! 
> (Most people would deinitely consider that a GOOD THING!)
> 
> Well, almost. I went from MSDOS to UNIX and then Linux. Never had Windows as
> my personal 'daily-driver'.
> 
> (Aually, I was using X11 desktops on UNIX, and had heard 'Wonderful Things'
> about this new 'Windows thing'.  So I tried it and was aghast at just how
> **bad** and primitive it was, compared to what I was already using.)
> 
> Jack

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]


#60997

Fromcandycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid>
Date2024-11-15 21:10 +0000
Message-ID<slrnvjfdot.1admf.candycanearter07@candydeb.host.invalid>
In reply to#60984
Ruben Safir <mrbrklyn@panix.com> wrote at 01:31 this Friday (GMT):
> Jack Strangio  <jackstrangio@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> writes:
>>> 
>>> To be fair, having Linux as your first OS would be very rare.
>> 
>
> Who cares.  It is the only OS I have used since 1998 at least.
>
> Everything else I look at sucks.
>
> Programs I install
> Openshot
> Firefox
> Gimp
> GVIM
> thunderbird
> mutt
> gcc
> make
> Perl
> Python
> gdb
> vlc
> crossfire-gtk
> gnuplot
> dia
> inkscape
> scribus
> xcalc
> oclock
> windowmaker
> X11
> openrc
> hexchat
> popcorntime
> transmission
> open-nusismat
> make
> rsync
> ssh!!
>
> at minimum
>> Hey, look, guys! I'm a rarity!! 
>> (Most people would deinitely consider that a GOOD THING!)
>> 
>> Well, almost. I went from MSDOS to UNIX and then Linux. Never had Windows as
>> my personal 'daily-driver'.
>> 
>> (Aually, I was using X11 desktops on UNIX, and had heard 'Wonderful Things'
>> about this new 'Windows thing'.  So I tried it and was aghast at just how
>> **bad** and primitive it was, compared to what I was already using.)
>> 
>> Jack


I thought older windows was good for it's time, but yeah nowadays I'm
leaning more towards Linux. I haven't heard of some of these, thanks for
bringing it up!
-- 
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#60999

FromPhillip Frabott <nntp@fulltermprivacy.com>
Date2024-11-15 20:26 -0500
Message-ID<vh8sbb$3m7vt$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#60984
nano
git
openssh
gnutls
links
bash
automake
autoconf
gcc
mutt
htop
iotop
gomuks
tmux
WordGrinder

and that's it.

When I'm done I go home and spend the evening with family.

-- 
Phillip Frabott
----------
- Adam: Is a void really a void if it returns?
- Jack: No, it's just nullspace at that point.
----------

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#61014

FromD <nospam@example.net>
Date2024-11-16 10:31 +0100
Message-ID<8db593ab-0793-2b31-ebc3-922a5d2fc241@example.net>
In reply to#60999

On Fri, 15 Nov 2024, Phillip Frabott wrote:

> nano
> git
> openssh
> gnutls
> links
> bash
> automake
> autoconf
> gcc
> mutt
> htop
> iotop
> gomuks
> tmux
> WordGrinder
>
> and that's it.
>
> When I'm done I go home and spend the evening with family.

Wordgrinder is not a common choice. Could you please tell me a bit about 
it? Wat is it with wordgrinder that guys you joy when writing texts?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#61018

FromPhillip Frabott <nntp@fulltermprivacy.com>
Date2024-11-16 09:42 -0500
Message-ID<vhaavs$298a$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#61014
On 11/16/2024 04:31, D wrote:
> 
> 
> On Fri, 15 Nov 2024, Phillip Frabott wrote:
> 
>> nano
>> git
>> openssh
>> gnutls
>> links
>> bash
>> automake
>> autoconf
>> gcc
>> mutt
>> htop
>> iotop
>> gomuks
>> tmux
>> WordGrinder
>>
>> and that's it.
>>
>> When I'm done I go home and spend the evening with family.
> 
> Wordgrinder is not a common choice. Could you please tell me a bit about 
> it? Wat is it with wordgrinder that guys you joy when writing texts?

I should probably note, if it's not apparent in the list above, I live 
in bash. I do not use a WM day-to-day. I'm a purist shell-only user. 
WordGrinder is the only shell program I was able to find that has 
support great support for ODT, a format that I have to be able to use at 
work since almost all of our documents are either ODT or MD (Mostly 
ODT). It has a pretty decent spell checker that you can add to it's 
dictionary and has pretty good formatting support within the limitations 
of shell (You won't be adding images, but I don't get paid enough to 
make documentation with pretty pictures anyways). It is probably the 
most feature-rich shell application I've found so far. You can look at 
it here if you want: https://cowlark.com/wordgrinder/

If you have a recommendation for something other then WordGrinder that 
works without any Xorg/X11 components installed though, I'd be happy to 
try it out. It has to support opening and saving (or 
importing/exporting) into ODT and MD formats and must be able to compile 
source-only and no docker.

Before you ask, since you'll probably find me in another thread asking 
about Gentoo related to KDE, I do have Xorg installed on another machine 
but it's only for the small sliver of time where I have to test a 
desktop program I'm writing for the company I work for. And I use a 
separate machine for that. Most of my time is in headless code though so 
it's not often I have to boot it up.

-- 
Phillip Frabott
----------
- Adam: Is a void really a void if it returns?
- Jack: No, it's just nullspace at that point.
----------

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#61023

FromD <nospam@example.net>
Date2024-11-16 22:20 +0100
Message-ID<d3b202fd-2dd2-c9ef-1d2a-579409defe83@example.net>
In reply to#61018

On Sat, 16 Nov 2024, Phillip Frabott wrote:

> On 11/16/2024 04:31, D wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> On Fri, 15 Nov 2024, Phillip Frabott wrote:
>> 
>>> nano
>>> git
>>> openssh
>>> gnutls
>>> links
>>> bash
>>> automake
>>> autoconf
>>> gcc
>>> mutt
>>> htop
>>> iotop
>>> gomuks
>>> tmux
>>> WordGrinder
>>> 
>>> and that's it.
>>> 
>>> When I'm done I go home and spend the evening with family.
>> 
>> Wordgrinder is not a common choice. Could you please tell me a bit about 
>> it? Wat is it with wordgrinder that guys you joy when writing texts?
>
> I should probably note, if it's not apparent in the list above, I live in 
> bash. I do not use a WM day-to-day. I'm a purist shell-only user. WordGrinder 
> is the only shell program I was able to find that has support great support 
> for ODT, a format that I have to be able to use at work since almost all of 
> our documents are either ODT or MD (Mostly ODT). It has a pretty decent spell 
> checker that you can add to it's dictionary and has pretty good formatting 
> support within the limitations of shell (You won't be adding images, but I 
> don't get paid enough to make documentation with pretty pictures anyways). It 
> is probably the most feature-rich shell application I've found so far. You 
> can look at it here if you want: https://cowlark.com/wordgrinder/
>
> If you have a recommendation for something other then WordGrinder that works 
> without any Xorg/X11 components installed though, I'd be happy to try it out. 
> It has to support opening and saving (or importing/exporting) into ODT and MD 
> formats and must be able to compile source-only and no docker.
>
> Before you ask, since you'll probably find me in another thread asking about 
> Gentoo related to KDE, I do have Xorg installed on another machine but it's 
> only for the small sliver of time where I have to test a desktop program I'm 
> writing for the company I work for. And I use a separate machine for that. 
> Most of my time is in headless code though so it's not often I have to boot 
> it up.

Thank you for sharing! Very interesting. What type of work do you do where 
you are able to get by with only the shell? You must have a very kind 
employer! =)

As for word processing, the usual suspects are vim, groff, latex and for 
converting documents back and forth, I think that pandoc is very common.

But this is all hearsay, so I am sure there are others here in this group 
who know much more about it than I do.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#61034

FromPhillip Frabott <nntp@fulltermprivacy.com>
Date2024-11-17 09:33 -0500
Message-ID<vhcus9$lu8r$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#61023
On 11/16/2024 16:20, D wrote:
> 
> 
> On Sat, 16 Nov 2024, Phillip Frabott wrote:
> 
>> On 11/16/2024 04:31, D wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, 15 Nov 2024, Phillip Frabott wrote:
>>>
>>>> nano
>>>> git
>>>> openssh
>>>> gnutls
>>>> links
>>>> bash
>>>> automake
>>>> autoconf
>>>> gcc
>>>> mutt
>>>> htop
>>>> iotop
>>>> gomuks
>>>> tmux
>>>> WordGrinder
>>>>
>>>> and that's it.
>>>>
>>>> When I'm done I go home and spend the evening with family.
>>>
>>> Wordgrinder is not a common choice. Could you please tell me a bit 
>>> about it? Wat is it with wordgrinder that guys you joy when writing 
>>> texts?
>>
>> I should probably note, if it's not apparent in the list above, I live 
>> in bash. I do not use a WM day-to-day. I'm a purist shell-only user. 
>> WordGrinder is the only shell program I was able to find that has 
>> support great support for ODT, a format that I have to be able to use 
>> at work since almost all of our documents are either ODT or MD (Mostly 
>> ODT). It has a pretty decent spell checker that you can add to it's 
>> dictionary and has pretty good formatting support within the 
>> limitations of shell (You won't be adding images, but I don't get paid 
>> enough to make documentation with pretty pictures anyways). It is 
>> probably the most feature-rich shell application I've found so far. 
>> You can look at it here if you want: https://cowlark.com/wordgrinder/
>>
>> If you have a recommendation for something other then WordGrinder that 
>> works without any Xorg/X11 components installed though, I'd be happy 
>> to try it out. It has to support opening and saving (or importing/ 
>> exporting) into ODT and MD formats and must be able to compile source- 
>> only and no docker.
>>
>> Before you ask, since you'll probably find me in another thread asking 
>> about Gentoo related to KDE, I do have Xorg installed on another 
>> machine but it's only for the small sliver of time where I have to 
>> test a desktop program I'm writing for the company I work for. And I 
>> use a separate machine for that. Most of my time is in headless code 
>> though so it's not often I have to boot it up.
> 
> Thank you for sharing! Very interesting. What type of work do you do 
> where you are able to get by with only the shell? You must have a very 
> kind employer! =)

I am a headless C developer (Sometimes C++). I develop code that must 
run on machines that have zero interfaces or local terminal access. I 
think the new term is headless software engineer but that's just a 
little too fancy of a title for me. So I stick with C developer. I code 
for anything from embedded devices (the smallest was a 1" by 1" device 
with 4MB of Flashable EEPROM and 1.25MB of memory on a 548MHz processor) 
all the way up to large data center scale servers. I also have a Data 
center background on top of that so it gives me a leg up when it comes 
to understanding how an application will be used. (most developers only 
learn to develop. They never go further to learn how it's going to be 
implemented and used later which means they can't account for the things 
their program will be demanded to do. I have the advantage of know how 
data centers work so I can code accordingly.)

Since the binary programs have to run headless, I code with shell access 
only. So I'm in a near comparable environment to how the program would 
be run. Limiting myself to only having shell access helps to put me (and 
my team of 11 which also work in shell only) in the mental state of how 
the program will operate. So if we can't do it from shell, then the 
headless binary won't be able to either. In fact, it's a requirement we 
code in shell only. Company law (I may or may not have been responsible 
for it. But I'll plead the 5th if you ask me.)

> 
> As for word processing, the usual suspects are vim, groff, latex and for 
> converting documents back and forth, I think that pandoc is very common.
> 
> But this is all hearsay, so I am sure there are others here in this 
> group who know much more about it than I do.

While I'm sure that Vim an Groff and others are capable of 
converting/using these formats back and forth, WordGrinder is a more 
dedicated purpose application. Trying to use multi-purpose editors just 
adds more complexity not to mention the fact that you have to build 
additional addons and configurations to get the feature set that 
WordGrinder provides out of the box. So that's why it was ultimately chosen.

-- 
Phillip Frabott
----------
- Adam: Is a void really a void if it returns?
- Jack: No, it's just nullspace at that point.
----------

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#61035

FromPancho <Pancho.Jones@proton.me>
Date2024-11-17 15:18 +0000
Message-ID<vhd1gi$lvfu$3@dont-email.me>
In reply to#61034
On 11/17/24 14:33, Phillip Frabott wrote:
> On 11/16/2024 16:20, D wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 16 Nov 2024, Phillip Frabott wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/16/2024 04:31, D wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, 15 Nov 2024, Phillip Frabott wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> nano
>>>>> git
>>>>> openssh
>>>>> gnutls
>>>>> links
>>>>> bash
>>>>> automake
>>>>> autoconf
>>>>> gcc
>>>>> mutt
>>>>> htop
>>>>> iotop
>>>>> gomuks
>>>>> tmux
>>>>> WordGrinder
>>>>>
>>>>> and that's it.
>>>>>
>>>>> When I'm done I go home and spend the evening with family.
>>>>
>>>> Wordgrinder is not a common choice. Could you please tell me a bit 
>>>> about it? Wat is it with wordgrinder that guys you joy when writing 
>>>> texts?
>>>
>>> I should probably note, if it's not apparent in the list above, I 
>>> live in bash. I do not use a WM day-to-day. I'm a purist shell-only 
>>> user. WordGrinder is the only shell program I was able to find that 
>>> has support great support for ODT, a format that I have to be able to 
>>> use at work since almost all of our documents are either ODT or MD 
>>> (Mostly ODT). It has a pretty decent spell checker that you can add 
>>> to it's dictionary and has pretty good formatting support within the 
>>> limitations of shell (You won't be adding images, but I don't get 
>>> paid enough to make documentation with pretty pictures anyways). It 
>>> is probably the most feature-rich shell application I've found so 
>>> far. You can look at it here if you want: 
>>> https://cowlark.com/wordgrinder/
>>>
>>> If you have a recommendation for something other then WordGrinder 
>>> that works without any Xorg/X11 components installed though, I'd be 
>>> happy to try it out. It has to support opening and saving (or 
>>> importing/ exporting) into ODT and MD formats and must be able to 
>>> compile source- only and no docker.
>>>
>>> Before you ask, since you'll probably find me in another thread 
>>> asking about Gentoo related to KDE, I do have Xorg installed on 
>>> another machine but it's only for the small sliver of time where I 
>>> have to test a desktop program I'm writing for the company I work 
>>> for. And I use a separate machine for that. Most of my time is in 
>>> headless code though so it's not often I have to boot it up.
>>
>> Thank you for sharing! Very interesting. What type of work do you do 
>> where you are able to get by with only the shell? You must have a very 
>> kind employer! =)
> 
> I am a headless C developer (Sometimes C++). I develop code that must 
> run on machines that have zero interfaces or local terminal access. I 
> think the new term is headless software engineer but that's just a 
> little too fancy of a title for me. So I stick with C developer. 

Backend developer, or driver/service/server developer as opposed to 
frontend, GUI, or UI developer. Never heard headless developer.


> I code 
> for anything from embedded devices (the smallest was a 1" by 1" device 
> with 4MB of Flashable EEPROM and 1.25MB of memory on a 548MHz processor) 
> all the way up to large data center scale servers. I also have a Data 
> center background on top of that so it gives me a leg up when it comes 
> to understanding how an application will be used. (most developers only 
> learn to develop. They never go further to learn how it's going to be 
> implemented and used later which means they can't account for the things 
> their program will be demanded to do. I have the advantage of know how 
> data centers work so I can code accordingly.)
> 
> Since the binary programs have to run headless, I code with shell access 
> only. So I'm in a near comparable environment to how the program would 
> be run. Limiting myself to only having shell access helps to put me (and 
> my team of 11 which also work in shell only) in the mental state of how 
> the program will operate. So if we can't do it from shell, then the 
> headless binary won't be able to either. In fact, it's a requirement we 
> code in shell only. Company law (I may or may not have been responsible 
> for it. But I'll plead the 5th if you ask me.)
> 

That is bizarre. It is much easier to code, debug, test in a good 
graphical IDE, even if you are developing console apps.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#61036

FromCharlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
Date2024-11-17 17:17 +0000
Message-ID<Ryp_O.14390$V2ha.7339@fx18.iad>
In reply to#61035
On 2024-11-17, Pancho <Pancho.Jones@proton.me> wrote:

> On 11/17/24 14:33, Phillip Frabott wrote:
>
>> I am a headless C developer (Sometimes C++).

Is that like Roland the headless Thompson gunner?  :-)
(Thank you, Warren Zevon.)

> That is bizarre. It is much easier to code, debug, test in a good 
> graphical IDE, even if you are developing console apps.

Horses for courses.  Never underestimate the value of a
few printf()s sprinkled here and there (or log file writes
if you're really headless).  I'm still a fan of makefiles.

-- 
/~\  Charlie Gibbs                  |  Growth for the sake of
\ /  <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>      |  growth is the ideology
 X   I'm really at ac.dekanfrus     |  of the cancer cell.
/ \  if you read it the right way.  |    -- Edward Abbey

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#61038

FromPancho <Pancho.Jones@proton.me>
Date2024-11-17 17:54 +0000
Message-ID<vhdako$njm8$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#61036
On 11/17/24 17:17, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2024-11-17, Pancho <Pancho.Jones@proton.me> wrote:
> 
>> On 11/17/24 14:33, Phillip Frabott wrote:
>>
>>> I am a headless C developer (Sometimes C++).
> 
> Is that like Roland the headless Thompson gunner?  :-)
> (Thank you, Warren Zevon.)
> 
>> That is bizarre. It is much easier to code, debug, test in a good
>> graphical IDE, even if you are developing console apps.
> 
> Horses for courses.  Never underestimate the value of a
> few printf()s sprinkled here and there (or log file writes
> if you're really headless).  I'm still a fan of makefiles.
> 

Not really, people who use IDE's still use loggers.

People who use IDEs, use build automation scripts: Gradle, Mavern. It is 
rude to force people to use a specific IDE, so some kind of IDE 
independent (cross compatible) project definition build script is needed.

Caveat: I don't really remember make.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#61040

Fromrbowman <bowman@montana.com>
Date2024-11-17 18:07 +0000
Message-ID<lpupnaFebe4U1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#61036
On Sun, 17 Nov 2024 17:17:37 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:

> Horses for courses.  Never underestimate the value of a few printf()s
> sprinkled here and there (or log file writes if you're really headless).
>  I'm still a fan of makefiles.

I'm a dinosaur so my preferred technique is either printf or log files. 
For production code I've sometimes created a sequence of log statements 
that can be turned on with a flag that are a narrative of what's going on. 
My goal is a support person can read the file and see where the problem 
occurs. Often it is a configuration issue they can fix. 

The nice part is the technique can be used with any language and is 
effective where a debugger isn't available.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#61052

FromD <nospam@example.net>
Date2024-11-18 10:11 +0100
Message-ID<21b22605-35be-2f46-1465-bbed8aed3533@example.net>
In reply to#61040

On Sun, 17 Nov 2024, rbowman wrote:

> On Sun, 17 Nov 2024 17:17:37 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
>> Horses for courses.  Never underestimate the value of a few printf()s
>> sprinkled here and there (or log file writes if you're really headless).
>>  I'm still a fan of makefiles.
>
> I'm a dinosaur so my preferred technique is either printf or log files.
> For production code I've sometimes created a sequence of log statements
> that can be turned on with a flag that are a narrative of what's going on.
> My goal is a support person can read the file and see where the problem
> occurs. Often it is a configuration issue they can fix.
>
> The nice part is the technique can be used with any language and is
> effective where a debugger isn't available.
>

I'm a printf-man, and since I've mostly worked with systems and not mainly 
code logfiles have been essential for me. Have never had the need to go 
deeper than that.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#61083

From"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>
Date2024-11-19 08:57 +0100
Message-ID<cvst0lxae.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>
In reply to#61040
On 2024-11-17 19:07, rbowman wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Nov 2024 17:17:37 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> 
>> Horses for courses.  Never underestimate the value of a few printf()s
>> sprinkled here and there (or log file writes if you're really headless).
>>   I'm still a fan of makefiles.
> 
> I'm a dinosaur so my preferred technique is either printf or log files.
> For production code I've sometimes created a sequence of log statements
> that can be turned on with a flag that are a narrative of what's going on.
> My goal is a support person can read the file and see where the problem
> occurs. Often it is a configuration issue they can fix.
> 
> The nice part is the technique can be used with any language and is
> effective where a debugger isn't available.

The other day a daemon program spewed 2 gigabytes of log entries, all 
almost identical (the filename changed). The program was tracker-extract.

Currently there are many programs that spew chat like there is no 
tomorrow to syslog :-/

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#61098

Fromrbowman <bowman@montana.com>
Date2024-11-19 19:34 +0000
Message-ID<lq47h9F9213U1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#61083
On Tue, 19 Nov 2024 08:57:00 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:

> The other day a daemon program spewed 2 gigabytes of log entries, all
> almost identical (the filename changed). The program was
> tracker-extract.
> 
> Currently there are many programs that spew chat like there is no
> tomorrow to syslog :-/

My favorite was a Windows process that repeatedly logged the C: drive was 
almost full -- to the C: drive of course. Cleaning up after it 
successfully committed suicide was fun.

We had a couple of programs that would politely check for disk space 
before running. That worked well for years before the first machines with 
TB+ drives showed up.  Back to the drawing board for the disk space 
calculation.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#61120

From"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>
Date2024-11-20 14:50 +0100
Message-ID<91611lxr5n.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>
In reply to#61098
On 2024-11-19 20:34, rbowman wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Nov 2024 08:57:00 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> 
>> The other day a daemon program spewed 2 gigabytes of log entries, all
>> almost identical (the filename changed). The program was
>> tracker-extract.
>>
>> Currently there are many programs that spew chat like there is no
>> tomorrow to syslog :-/
> 
> My favorite was a Windows process that repeatedly logged the C: drive was
> almost full -- to the C: drive of course. Cleaning up after it
> successfully committed suicide was fun.
> 
> We had a couple of programs that would politely check for disk space
> before running. That worked well for years before the first machines with
> TB+ drives showed up.  Back to the drawing board for the disk space
> calculation.

You may remember the Borland Pascal code to insert a delay of so many 
milliseconds in the code. It was simply a noop loop, and the runtime 
code made a measurement at start. That worked well, till faster 
computers made the counting time variable to overflow.

I don't remember right now if the code crashed or not. (Google confirms 
they crashed)

Every program made with those compilers were affected. You needed to 
recompile with a newer version. (Google said you could apply an 
external, third party, patch)

Possibly Borland C was also affected, but I do not know.

https://www.vogons.org/viewtopic.php?t=50079
https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~bds2/ltsn/tpbug.htm
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20787583


-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#61042

FromLawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid>
Date2024-11-17 19:36 +0000
Message-ID<vhdgju$piji$4@dont-email.me>
In reply to#61036
On Sun, 17 Nov 2024 17:17:37 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:

> Never underestimate the value of a few printf()s
> sprinkled here and there (or log file writes if you're really headless).

I don’t really see that much difference. On *nix systems, service managers 
can redirect stdout or stderr to logfiles anyway, so I can run my code 
directly from a terminal for testing, and then in the background via a 
service definition for production use, without having to make any code 
changes.

> I'm still a fan of makefiles.

Automated build scripts certainly. Ninja seems to be a common alternative 
to make nowadays. But you need a higher-level wrapper to generate the 
control files: e.g. Autotools, Meson, CMake etc.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#61037

FromThe Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date2024-11-17 17:47 +0000
Message-ID<vhda81$oe7t$3@dont-email.me>
In reply to#61035
On 17/11/2024 15:18, Pancho wrote:
> It is much easier to code, debug, test in a good graphical IDE, even if 
> you are developing console apps.

Not if the target machine doesn't have a  GUI or a console at all.

-- 
Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the 
gospel of envy.

Its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.

Winston Churchill

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#61039

FromPancho <Pancho.Jones@proton.me>
Date2024-11-17 18:06 +0000
Message-ID<vhdbb7$njm8$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to#61037
On 11/17/24 17:47, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 17/11/2024 15:18, Pancho wrote:
>> It is much easier to code, debug, test in a good graphical IDE, even 
>> if you are developing console apps.
> 
> Not if the target machine doesn't have a  GUI or a console at all.
> 

Even then, develop in an IDE, run on the target machine.

I never really believed Linus' assertion that developers needed to 
develop on the same OS that the software was going to run on. As soon as 
Microsoft Visual Studio came out, mid 1990s, we used it on PCs to 
develop programs that ran on Solaris servers. We probably retained the 
capability to make final adjustments on the Sparc, but that wasn't where 
the main bulk of the work was done. I seem to remember we had the 
capability to build from makefiles, but I can't remember if we loaded 
the makefiles into Visual Studio or generated them from Visual Studio, 
or both.

Visual Studio was just better than vi, I find it strange to even have to 
debate that point.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#61041

FromLawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid>
Date2024-11-17 19:32 +0000
Message-ID<vhdgc3$piji$3@dont-email.me>
In reply to#61039
On Sun, 17 Nov 2024 18:06:31 +0000, Pancho wrote:

> ... I can't remember if we loaded 
> the makefiles into Visual Studio or generated them from Visual Studio, 
> or both.

Visual Studio has never had the capability to work with *nix-style 
Makefiles. That’s one reason why “meta-build” systems (my term) like CMake 
were invented: their build scripts are higher-level wrappers that will 
generate, for example, Makefiles or Ninja control files on *nix, and 
Visual Studio project files on Windows.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#61043

FromPhillip Frabott <nntp@fulltermprivacy.com>
Date2024-11-17 14:52 -0500
Message-ID<vhdhio$pqcq$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#61035
On 11/17/2024 10:18, Pancho wrote:
> 
> That is bizarre. It is much easier to code, debug, test in a good 
> graphical IDE, even if you are developing console apps.
> 
> 

Your assuming that a debugger can even run on such limited memory on the 
specific CPU being used. Most of my work involves very limited memory 
constraints. And these aren't x86 compatible processors so it's not like 
I can debug on the local dev machine. It all has to run on the hardware. 
so printf() and the occasional rawdump file being stored on an SD card 
if your lucky enough to get access to a device with an SD card reader is 
the only real option. Obviously this wouldn't be true for the larger 
headless systems but I'm not going to have 2 different development 
configurations for coding embedded devices vs large servers. And GUI's 
just become distractions anyways. Everything I need is in bash. So if I 
was to use a GUI I'd be right back into multiple bash windows with no 
desktop apps anyways, so why waste the resources of GUI when I'm never 
going to utilize it the way it was meant to be used?

It's just a different breed of development here. We are very uncommon. 
But we love it.

-- 
Phillip Frabott
----------
- Adam: Is a void really a void if it returns?
- Jack: No, it's just nullspace at that point.
----------

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


Page 1 of 5  [1] 2 3 4 5  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc


csiph-web