Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.unix.shell > #26646 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-03-12 07:21 +0000 |
| Last post | 2026-03-15 12:39 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 178 — 20 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.unix.shell
Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-03-12 07:21 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-03-12 03:42 -0400
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-03-12 12:34 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-03-12 15:08 +0000
Just out of curiosity... (Was: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-03-12 15:22 +0000
Re: Just out of curiosity... (Was: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-03-12 15:29 +0000
Re: Just out of curiosity... Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-03-12 16:31 +0000
Re: Just out of curiosity... (Was: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-12 19:04 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> - 2026-03-12 17:58 -0400
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-12 09:00 +0100
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-12 10:59 +0100
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-03-12 12:44 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-12 14:12 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-03-12 09:58 -0700
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting Jim Jackson <jj@franjam.org.uk> - 2026-03-12 19:38 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-12 20:18 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-13 11:37 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-13 19:24 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-03-12 20:57 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-03-13 07:59 +1000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-13 11:44 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 08:00 -0700
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-13 16:03 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 09:26 -0700
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-13 19:02 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 12:21 -0700
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-13 20:56 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 14:14 -0700
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-13 21:52 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 15:03 -0700
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-03-13 22:08 +0000
[OT] Static HTML and using PHP or Javascript (was Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-14 03:56 +0100
Re: [OT] Static HTML and using PHP or Javascript (was Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-14 12:49 +0000
Re: [OT] Static HTML and using PHP or Javascript (was Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-14 19:07 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-14 02:35 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-03-13 23:26 -0400
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-14 04:59 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-03-14 02:35 -0400
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-14 18:38 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-14 12:38 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-03-16 08:21 -0700
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-16 17:48 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-03-17 02:08 -0400
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-03-14 08:06 +1000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-03-14 07:51 +1000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-12 19:46 +0100
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-12 19:03 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-12 20:44 +0100
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-13 11:32 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2026-03-13 12:57 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-13 13:33 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2026-03-13 23:17 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-03-14 01:21 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-03-13 21:58 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2026-03-13 23:01 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-03-13 23:07 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-14 03:08 +0000
[OT] Religion and War (was Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-14 04:54 +0100
Re: [OT] Religion and War (was Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-03-14 13:18 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2026-03-13 21:32 -0700
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting (religion) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-14 17:36 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting (religion) Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-14 17:52 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting (religion) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-15 02:32 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting (religion) Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2026-03-14 11:35 -0700
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting (religion) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-15 02:39 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting (religion) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-15 12:33 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting (religion) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-03-16 00:03 -0400
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting (religion) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-16 13:12 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting (religion) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-16 20:18 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting (religion) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-14 22:38 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting (religion) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-15 02:45 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting (religion) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-15 12:36 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-14 12:30 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-13 19:33 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-13 21:08 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-14 02:53 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-13 22:37 +0100
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-13 21:54 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-14 04:00 +0100
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-12 19:23 +0100
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-03-12 20:50 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-13 03:05 +0100
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-03-13 03:00 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-03-12 23:35 -0400
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-13 12:03 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-13 04:59 +0100
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-03-13 01:32 -0400
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-13 12:07 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2026-03-13 12:48 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-03-13 21:59 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2026-03-13 23:01 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-13 23:09 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-03-14 06:29 -0400
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-14 12:36 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-14 03:19 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-03-14 04:10 -0400
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-14 15:28 +0100
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-14 18:58 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-14 13:02 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-13 19:13 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 03:20 -0700
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-13 12:14 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-13 22:02 +0100
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-13 11:52 +0000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-03-13 07:43 +1000
Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-13 11:38 +0000
Unsettling bash tutorial (was: Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting) Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-14 11:07 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-14 15:53 +0100
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-14 22:34 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-03-14 22:14 -0400
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-15 04:55 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-03-15 04:01 -0400
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-03-15 12:30 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-15 12:39 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-15 20:45 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-03-15 23:20 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-16 02:03 +0000
Accessing args in csh/tcsh aliases (Was: Unsettling bash tutorial) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-03-16 02:41 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-15 12:38 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-15 20:47 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-15 20:44 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-03-15 23:36 -0400
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-16 05:48 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-03-16 05:11 -0400
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-16 19:44 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2026-03-16 13:29 -0700
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-03-17 00:02 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-17 00:36 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-03-17 03:18 -0400
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-17 18:13 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-03-18 03:00 -0400
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-18 18:19 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-18 18:29 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-03-18 23:30 -0400
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-19 05:36 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-03-19 05:51 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-03-19 03:59 -0400
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-19 19:16 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-19 20:34 +0100
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-03-20 03:23 -0400
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-20 12:28 +0100
Babbling about chemistry (Was: Unsettling bash tutorial) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-03-19 20:19 +0000
Re: Babbling about chemistry (Was: Unsettling bash tutorial) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-19 20:47 +0000
Re: Babbling about chemistry (Was: Unsettling bash tutorial) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-03-19 23:21 -0400
Re: Babbling about chemistry (Was: Unsettling bash tutorial) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-20 05:13 +0100
Re: Babbling about chemistry (Was: Unsettling bash tutorial) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-03-20 07:09 +0000
Re: Babbling about chemistry (Was: Unsettling bash tutorial) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-03-20 07:21 +0000
Re: Babbling about chemistry (Was: Unsettling bash tutorial) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-20 12:19 +0100
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-03-20 02:45 -0400
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-03-19 03:07 -0400
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-19 13:33 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-19 13:33 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-03-18 23:07 -0400
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-03-19 03:46 -0400
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-03-19 18:18 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-17 00:24 +0000
Knoppix (Was: Unsettling bash tutorial) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-03-17 00:56 +0000
Re: Knoppix (Was: Unsettling bash tutorial) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-17 06:05 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2026-03-16 22:38 -0700
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-16 13:06 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-03-16 09:52 -0400
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-16 14:21 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-16 14:35 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2026-03-16 10:39 -0700
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-16 17:44 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2026-03-16 18:03 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2026-03-16 11:09 -0700
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-16 19:53 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-16 20:25 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-03-17 02:10 -0400
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-03-17 02:05 -0400
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-03-17 19:35 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-03-17 01:57 -0400
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-03-16 19:49 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-03-17 02:59 -0400
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) - 2026-03-15 02:20 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-03-15 08:08 +0000
Re: Unsettling bash tutorial gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-03-15 12:39 +0000
Page 2 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next page →
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-13 11:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <10p0ta9$30rut$14@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #26669 |
On 12/03/2026 21:59, Computer Nerd Kev wrote: > I have seen a static site generator written in C, but I don't think > it was anyone's idea of elegance. A C program that only needs to > run once (for its author, at least) can cut a_lot_ of corners! > I use PHP and javaScript because they are ubiquitous - and totally horrible too. Some of my PHP calls C code to do the heavy lifting. PHPs implementation of the mySQL API is deeply flawed. I could, and probably ought to, use C more than php. But its a nasty quick hack that works well *enough*. And can be documented as well javaScript sucxks worse than an industrial vacuum cleaner, but there isn't anything else I know of to implement cient side complexity > I am sometimes tempted to use C for dynamic sites, though many > claim PHP is just as fast these days anyway. Php is nowhere near as fast as C, but it is for sure *fast enough*. Mostly -- “It is hard to imagine a more stupid decision or more dangerous way of making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people who pay no price for being wrong.” Thomas Sowell
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-13 08:00 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <20260313080000.00004c23@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #26669 |
On 13 Mar 2026 07:59:02 +1000 not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) wrote: > I've done the same thing using PHP, running the script from the > command-line to generate the static site. I've done it in Bash > earlier too, but I ran into things that are just much easier in > PHP since it's built for generating HTML. Oh, that's a clever notion! Hadn't thought of doing it that way.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-13 16:03 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <10p1cg9$3an5p$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #26687 |
On 13/03/2026 15:00, John Ames wrote: > On 13 Mar 2026 07:59:02 +1000 > not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) wrote: > >> I've done the same thing using PHP, running the script from the >> command-line to generate the static site. I've done it in Bash >> earlier too, but I ran into things that are just much easier in >> PHP since it's built for generating HTML. > > Oh, that's a clever notion! Hadn't thought of doing it that way. > There is no point in using PHP to generate a *static* site. It is after all for *active* sites. -- "If you don’t read the news paper, you are un-informed. If you read the news paper, you are mis-informed." Mark Twain
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-13 09:26 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <20260313092610.000065be@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #26688 |
On Fri, 13 Mar 2026 16:03:21 +0000 The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: > > Oh, that's a clever notion! Hadn't thought of doing it that way. > > There is no point in using PHP to generate a *static* site. It is > after all for *active* sites. Allows you to use the same language across the board. A bit unorthodox, but I can see the use of it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-13 19:02 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <10p1mva$3g8pp$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #26689 |
On 13/03/2026 16:26, John Ames wrote: > On Fri, 13 Mar 2026 16:03:21 +0000 > The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: > >>> Oh, that's a clever notion! Hadn't thought of doing it that way. >> >> There is no point in using PHP to generate a *static* site. It is >> after all for *active* sites. > > Allows you to use the same language across the board. A bit unorthodox, > but I can see the use of it. > But 90% of my php is in fact straight HTML. -- There is nothing a fleet of dispatchable nuclear power plants cannot do that cannot be done worse and more expensively and with higher carbon emissions and more adverse environmental impact by adding intermittent renewable energy.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-13 12:21 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <20260313122129.00007909@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #26690 |
On Fri, 13 Mar 2026 19:02:02 +0000 The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: > > Allows you to use the same language across the board. A bit > > unorthodox, but I can see the use of it. > > But 90% of my php is in fact straight HTML. Ditto - but adding PHP (or another preprocessor utility) to the mix allows me to write the common sections (header, footer, nav. sidebar) once, in a separate file, rather than having to update them manually across every single page every time I need to change something. It's not *as* useful when it's not happening automagically server-side, but it still saves a lot of tedium.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-13 20:56 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <10p1tmf$3j7m7$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #26692 |
On 13/03/2026 19:21, John Ames wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Mar 2026 19:02:02 +0000
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>>> Allows you to use the same language across the board. A bit
>>> unorthodox, but I can see the use of it.
>>
>> But 90% of my php is in fact straight HTML.
>
> Ditto - but adding PHP (or another preprocessor utility) to the mix
> allows me to write the common sections (header, footer, nav. sidebar)
> once, in a separate file, rather than having to update them manually
> across every single page every time I need to change something. It's
> not *as* useful when it's not happening automagically server-side, but
> it still saves a lot of tedium.
>
You can do the same with javaScript
--
"First, find out who are the people you can not criticise. They are your
oppressors."
- George Orwell
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-13 14:14 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <20260313141431.000058dc@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #26695 |
On Fri, 13 Mar 2026 20:56:47 +0000 The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: > > Ditto - but adding PHP (or another preprocessor utility) to the mix > > allows me to write the common sections (header, footer, nav. > > sidebar) once, in a separate file, rather than having to update > > them manually across every single page every time I need to change > > something. It's not *as* useful when it's not happening > > automagically server-side, but it still saves a lot of tedium. > > You can do the same with javaScript IMNSHO the use of client-side scripting to load and display static page content should be considered Objectively Wrong, so...nope.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-13 21:52 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <10p20v6$3j7m7$8@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #26698 |
On 13/03/2026 21:14, John Ames wrote: > On Fri, 13 Mar 2026 20:56:47 +0000 > The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: > >>> Ditto - but adding PHP (or another preprocessor utility) to the mix >>> allows me to write the common sections (header, footer, nav. >>> sidebar) once, in a separate file, rather than having to update >>> them manually across every single page every time I need to change >>> something. It's not *as* useful when it's not happening >>> automagically server-side, but it still saves a lot of tedium. >> >> You can do the same with javaScript > > IMNSHO the use of client-side scripting to load and display static page > content should be considered Objectively Wrong, so...nope. > Christ! There is so much religion here the odour of sanctity is making me vomit... -- “The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools.” Herbert Spencer
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-13 15:03 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <20260313150359.00002154@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #26701 |
On Fri, 13 Mar 2026 21:52:38 +0000 The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: > > IMNSHO the use of client-side scripting to load and display static > > page content should be considered Objectively Wrong, so...nope. > > Christ! There is so much religion here the odour of sanctity is > making me vomit... As I'm an ocean and a continent removed from your end of the exchange, that's fine by me ;P
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-13 22:08 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <10p21sn$3kl4p$7@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #26698 |
On Fri, 13 Mar 2026 14:14:31 -0700, John Ames wrote: > IMNSHO the use of client-side scripting to load and display static > page content should be considered Objectively Wrong ... I once took a web page created by a friend, displaying a static table of information (about CPU processors), and reduced it from nearly a megabyte in size down to a little over 100K. I put all the table info into JavaScript structures, and had code that ran on page load to generate the display tables from that. I also added dynamic sorting features, so you could rearrange the table by the values of selected columns by clicking on the column headings. The sorting code knew something about the units used for numeric values in certain columns, so it could, e.g. interpret “1M” as greater than “2K”. All the work was done in the browser.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-14 03:56 +0100 |
| Subject | [OT] Static HTML and using PHP or Javascript (was Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting) |
| Message-ID | <10p2ip1$3r45b$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #26707 |
On 2026-03-13 23:08, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: > On Fri, 13 Mar 2026 14:14:31 -0700, John Ames wrote: > >> IMNSHO the use of client-side scripting to load and display static >> page content should be considered Objectively Wrong ... > > I once took a web page created by a friend, displaying a static table > of information (about CPU processors), and reduced it from nearly a > megabyte in size down to a little over 100K. I put all the table info > into JavaScript structures, and had code that ran on page load to > generate the display tables from that. > > I also added dynamic sorting features, so you could rearrange the > table by the values of selected columns by clicking on the column > headings. The sorting code knew something about the units used for > numeric values in certain columns, so it could, e.g. interpret “1M” as > greater than “2K”. > > All the work was done in the browser. Usually I avoid unnecessary dynamic content if possible. (And John had been speaking about static pages.) I also avoid use of frameworks or dependencies in general. Despite having meanwhile spent many years and created dozens of web-pages and various types of content I'm no HTML/CSS/JS expert or anything (as I value it). During my engagement with the topic I had chosen various methods to address creation of HTML tables. Plain bloated handwritten HTHL, use of CSS classes to reduce the bloat, accepting the HTML-tags overhead and creating the content using shell/awk scripts, using JS featured tables, generating the HTML tables by JS, and maybe more that I might have forgot. I'm not sure what the real web-technology experts would say. I'd certainly try to avoid use of dynamic languages for static pages (I don't much like Javascript as language and I sort of hate PHP from a programming language perspective; but I regularly used the former and [only] in one small case had used the latter). I'm not running an own server, so for dynamic content I used JS. I observed that you can do a lot to reduce bloat by using CSS. Janis
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-14 12:49 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Static HTML and using PHP or Javascript (was Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting) |
| Message-ID | <10p3lgl$8394$7@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #26716 |
On 14/03/2026 02:56, Janis Papanagnou wrote: > I'm not sure what the real web-technology experts would say. I'd > certainly try to avoid use of dynamic languages for static pages > (I don't much like Javascript as language and I sort of hate PHP > from a programming language perspective; but I regularly used the > former and [only] in one small case had used the latter). > Horses for courses. I think PHP sucks, but if you want, for example, a web page that returns the content of a dynamically altering text file on the host, a file which is not uniquely identified by name, but by the first line of it's content...and there may be duplicates, but you want the one that has the latest timestamp, a static page wont cut it. PHP is a bit quicker than C. And making e.g. Apache use PHP is a well documented piece of cake. Making it run C is a lot more effort. > I'm not running an own server, so for dynamic content I used JS. > I observed that you can do a lot to reduce bloat by using CSS. Indeed, until your css file itself becomes the bloat. Likewise if you want your page to e.g. have a running clock on it, or to update a server without the user having to hit a submit button, or indeed have context sensitive menu trees etc, then you needs must use javaShite™. And deal with all the cruft placed in it by code gurus. -- When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men in a society, over the course of time they create for themselves a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it. Frédéric Bastiat
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-14 19:07 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Static HTML and using PHP or Javascript (was Re: Over-Elaborate Shell Scripting) |
| Message-ID | <n1lpvgF7sb5U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #26731 |
On Sat, 14 Mar 2026 12:49:25 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > PHP is a bit quicker than C. And making e.g. Apache use PHP is a well > documented piece of cake. Making it run C is a lot more effort. I don't know what the current status is but at one time Apache/FastCGI using C was a reasonable approach. Anything I've done in the last 10 years uses node/express on the backend. Deno and bun are challenging node but I don't see an advantage at this point. Neither are particularly stable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-14 02:35 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <n1jvrbFthd9U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #26692 |
On Fri, 13 Mar 2026 12:21:29 -0700, John Ames wrote: > On Fri, 13 Mar 2026 19:02:02 +0000 The Natural Philosopher > <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: > >> > Allows you to use the same language across the board. A bit >> > unorthodox, but I can see the use of it. >> >> But 90% of my php is in fact straight HTML. > > Ditto - but adding PHP (or another preprocessor utility) to the mix > allows me to write the common sections (header, footer, nav. sidebar) > once, in a separate file, rather than having to update them manually > across every single page every time I need to change something. It's not > *as* useful when it's not happening automagically server-side, but it > still saves a lot of tedium. There is a learning curve but in Python the Flask framework pulls in Jinja as the templating engine. https://jinja.palletsprojects.com/en/stable/templates/#template- inheritance We had a programmer who loved PHP (Personal Home Page). I dipped into the code a couple of times trying to do minor fixes and it wasn't pretty.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-13 23:26 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <UBycnZgN78XoSCn0nZ2dnZfqnPadnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #26714 |
On 3/13/26 22:35, rbowman wrote: > On Fri, 13 Mar 2026 12:21:29 -0700, John Ames wrote: > >> On Fri, 13 Mar 2026 19:02:02 +0000 The Natural Philosopher >> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: >> >>>> Allows you to use the same language across the board. A bit >>>> unorthodox, but I can see the use of it. >>> >>> But 90% of my php is in fact straight HTML. >> >> Ditto - but adding PHP (or another preprocessor utility) to the mix >> allows me to write the common sections (header, footer, nav. sidebar) >> once, in a separate file, rather than having to update them manually >> across every single page every time I need to change something. It's not >> *as* useful when it's not happening automagically server-side, but it >> still saves a lot of tedium. > > There is a learning curve but in Python the Flask framework pulls in Jinja > as the templating engine. > > https://jinja.palletsprojects.com/en/stable/templates/#template- > inheritance > > We had a programmer who loved PHP (Personal Home Page). I dipped into the > code a couple of times trying to do minor fixes and it wasn't pretty. Aww ... PHP is OK .. not all *that* different from 'C'. However it can be writ, well ... badly. If you need a web page to DO SHIT other than just sit there and look pretty then you need PHP. I often used those 'make yer own page' apps/CMS - cheap - to set up the HTML/pages ... the annoying stuff ... and then used PHP to add IQ. Worked well, fairly quick. Found Joomla to be maybe the best compromise of features, though there is a bit of a learning curve compared to, say, WordPress. Ok, hate to say the name, JavaScript works too ... The big 'personal' advantage of PHP is that it makes the SERVER do most of the work whereas the others burn YOUR cycles. Had a web page that asked for a password ... and if you failed it ran a JS bit that did lots of trig/float stuff in a tight loop - while showing a woodcut from Dante's Inferno. Yer fan would instantly shift to max gear and the browsers would start screaming about overtaxing content :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-14 04:59 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <n1k89mF258U4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #26720 |
On Fri, 13 Mar 2026 23:26:41 -0400, c186282 wrote:
> If you need a web page to DO SHIT other than just sit there and look
> pretty then you need PHP. I often used those 'make yer own page'
> apps/CMS - cheap - to set up the HTML/pages ... the annoying stuff
> ... and then used PHP to add IQ. Worked well, fairly quick. Found
> Joomla to be maybe the best compromise of features, though there is a
> bit of a learning curve compared to, say, WordPress.
Never used it. Our SPA used Angular. The browser based apps I did prior to
the map being incorporated into the Angular project used Node.js/
Express.js on the backend and the Esri Javascript 3.x API on the fontend
for the map pieces.
I did a web app on the Pi yesterday. The Pi reads a I2C DHT11 sensor to
get the inside temperature and humidity and publishes it so I can get the
data in the browser on my main machine rather than switching to the Pi.
Tomorrow I'll probably expand it to query NOAA for the outside temperature
and humidity and add it to the page. Python/Flask.
fwiw, since the Flask package is included in the Pi's system site packages
I'm not in a venv. Also I spun off a process using
subprocess.Popen("python", "dht_simple.py") with no problem. The
subprocess does the actual hardware read and updates the html.
I suppose PHP was better than FrontPage that used millions of non-breaking
spaces to format a page. Like Cobol there is still a lot of it around.
However if I had a kid in college I would not advise them to use PHP.
https://kinsta.com/blog/php-vs-angular/
probably tl;dr. Synopsis:
"The Angular framework works excellent for building large-scale apps with
complexity and need of scalability.
PHP is an old player, and it’s still very much in the game. It’s a good,
low-cost option for you to develop a small business website, a portfolio
site, or even an ecommerce store."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-14 02:35 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <1dudnS4HlpEMnCj0nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #26723 |
On 3/14/26 00:59, rbowman wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Mar 2026 23:26:41 -0400, c186282 wrote:
>
>> If you need a web page to DO SHIT other than just sit there and look
>> pretty then you need PHP. I often used those 'make yer own page'
>> apps/CMS - cheap - to set up the HTML/pages ... the annoying stuff
>> ... and then used PHP to add IQ. Worked well, fairly quick. Found
>> Joomla to be maybe the best compromise of features, though there
is a
>> bit of a learning curve compared to, say, WordPress.
>
> Never used it. Our SPA used Angular. The browser based apps I did
prior to
> the map being incorporated into the Angular project used Node.js/
> Express.js on the backend and the Esri Javascript 3.x API on the fontend
> for the map pieces.
There are a variety of page builders. Some are very
simple, stuff like WordPress/Joomla fall in the middle.
However page layout - what/where/pretty-colors - tends
to be the Most Annoying bit. You can waste a LOT of
time trying to get it right by yourself.
However such pages are STUPID ... so PHP is needed
to add IQ.
PHP is not all-powerful ... hell, try to get it to
do anything off the webroot, gotta be creative !
However it's a LOT better than nothing.
Did a web app where I didn't want 'them' to have
much of anything to attack. The "real" web pages
were hidden off the root. Some PHP trix generated
a 'fake', temporary, image of the page where the
real code was off the root. After x-minutes it
would just be disappeared ... no URL or anything
to get back to it.
> I did a web app on the Pi yesterday. The Pi reads a I2C DHT11 sensor to
> get the inside temperature and humidity and publishes it so I can get the
> data in the browser on my main machine rather than switching to the Pi.
> Tomorrow I'll probably expand it to query NOAA for the outside
temperature
> and humidity and add it to the page. Python/Flask.
PIs are great ... but you don't build Industrial Strength
web pages for them. By the time you make them safe for
an outwards-facing server, well, the speed issues come up.
> fwiw, since the Flask package is included in the Pi's system site
packages
> I'm not in a venv. Also I spun off a process using
> subprocess.Popen("python", "dht_simple.py") with no problem. The
> subprocess does the actual hardware read and updates the html.
Flask is OK ... not gonna knock it. DO like Python
abilities too, beats the crap out of other 'script'
languages. However I still would not do "Industrial"
using Python. OK for more limited spheres however.
> I suppose PHP was better than FrontPage that used millions of
non-breaking
> spaces to format a page. Like Cobol there is still a lot of it around.
> However if I had a kid in college I would not advise them to use PHP.
>
> https://kinsta.com/blog/php-vs-angular/
Well, PHP isn't COBOL (I know, I used to do COBOL apps
in the Ancient World). I think of PHP as a relatively
easy, readable, way to add IQ to HTML pages. It's not
a BAD lang, you can do ALMOST anything with it.
> probably tl;dr. Synopsis:
>
> "The Angular framework works excellent for building large-scale apps with
> complexity and need of scalability.
>
> PHP is an old player, and it’s still very much in the game. It’s a good,
> low-cost option for you to develop a small business website, a portfolio
> site, or even an ecommerce store."
Correct - do NOT piss on PHP. It was made for a
particular, valuable, niche purpose and still
serves that well and simply.
If you can program 'C' or Pascal then you can
program PHP with No Problems.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-14 18:38 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <n1lo8pF6u7vU4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #26724 |
On Sat, 14 Mar 2026 02:35:05 -0400, c186282 wrote: > Correct - do NOT piss on PHP. It was made for a particular, valuable, > niche purpose and still serves that well and simply. It does but it isn't useful for most of the browser based maps I did. For work I used the Esri Javascript API but Leaflet is a popular open source. https://leafletjs.com/ You serve up the original page, but as you pan the map the client side is making many calls to a tile server to get the png pieces for the base map. https://tile.openstreetmap.org/13/4090/2724.png is an example. In Brave and Firefox <Ctrl><Shift><I> will bring up the developer tools panel. Select the network tab and you'll see all the calls. That would be difficult if not impossible to do server side. Back in the day I used FastCGI and C. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FastCGI I knew C and PHP wasn't very attractive. I understand it has improved. I didn't do any web stuff for ten or twelve years when I was tasked with developing a web map to replace a standalone that was locked to Visual C++ 6.0. By then Javascript was the way to go for both the front and back ends.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-14 12:38 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <10p3ksv$8394$6@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #26714 |
On 14/03/2026 02:35, rbowman wrote: > We had a programmer who loved PHP (Personal Home Page). I dipped into the > code a couple of times trying to do minor fixes and it wasn't pretty. PHP is as ugly as fuck. So is javaScript. But they work. And are widely supported, Chainsaws are also ugly as fuck., -- Civilization exists by geological consent, subject to change without notice. – Will Durant
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.unix.shell
csiph-web