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

Groups > comp.os.linux.embedded > #797 > unrolled thread

List of 6000 Linux C function calls and commands

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

Contents

  List of 6000 Linux C function calls and commands 7 <email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_com@enemygadgets.com> - 2015-01-24 16:58 +0000
    Re: List of 6000 Linux C function calls and commands owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-01-24 18:10 +0000
      Re: List of 6000 Linux C function calls and commands "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-01-24 13:30 -0500
        Re: List of 6000 Linux C function calls and commands Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-01-25 03:44 +0000
          Re: List of 6000 Linux C function calls and commands Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-01-25 06:42 -0500
            Re: List of 6000 Linux C function calls and commands 	flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-25 09:24 -0500
            Re: List of 6000 Linux C function calls and commands Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-01-25 16:42 +0000
              Re: List of 6000 Linux C function calls and commands JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-01-25 14:14 -0600
          Re: List of 6000 Linux C function calls and commands Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-01-25 12:41 +0000
          Re: List of 6000 Linux C function calls and commands "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-01-25 11:28 -0500
            Re: List of 6000 Linux C function calls and commands Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2015-01-25 11:37 -0500
            Re: List of 6000 Linux C function calls and commands Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-01-25 16:54 +0000
              Re: List of 6000 Linux C function calls and commands chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-26 07:12 -0600
                Re: List of 6000 Linux C function calls and commands BurfordTJustice <Burford@hub.dub> - 2015-01-26 08:19 -0500
                Re: List of 6000 Linux C function calls and commands JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-01-26 09:22 -0600
      Re: List of 6000 Linux C function calls and commands Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-01-24 22:20 +0000
    Re: List of 6000 Linux C function calls and commands Folderol <general@musically.me.uk> - 2015-01-24 18:17 +0000

#797 — List of 6000 Linux C function calls and commands

List of 6000 Linux C function calls and commands
------------------------------------------------

http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/dir_all_alphabetic.html

Whoa! Unbelievable. All documented including which header files to use
when calling functions, and the data types of the functions.

Developers can use this to make ANY new computing system or distro.

May be a new banking device, or a TV device, or a gaming device,
or a robot gadget, or a Internet of Things product, or a 
new tablet, or a  new smart watch, or a new 3D printer,
or a new digital camera, or a new digital telescope, or
a new security camera, etc etc etc.

Also documented are all the common commands that may be run
from bash console such as ls, date, cp, etc.
These functions are easy enough to call from C program
to make exceptionally light work of very complex operatons
without having to write all that in C.

Many of these commands are immensely useful in fault finding
roles.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#798

In comp.os.linux.advocacy 7 <email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_com@enemygadgets.com> wrote:
> List of 6000 Linux C function calls and commands
> ------------------------------------------------

> http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/dir_all_alphabetic.html

> Whoa! Unbelievable. All documented including which header files to use
> when calling functions, and the data types of the functions.

> Developers can use this to make ANY new computing system or distro.

> May be a new banking device, or a TV device, or a gaming device,
> or a robot gadget, or a Internet of Things product, or a 
> new tablet, or a  new smart watch, or a new 3D printer,
> or a new digital camera, or a new digital telescope, or
> a new security camera, etc etc etc.

> Also documented are all the common commands that may be run
> from bash console such as ls, date, cp, etc.
> These functions are easy enough to call from C program
> to make exceptionally light work of very complex operatons
> without having to write all that in C.

> Many of these commands are immensely useful in fault finding
> roles.

Why don't you just read the man pages in an xterm like everybody
else?

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

#800

"owl" <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote in message 
news:bghvue0.vjod@rooftop.invalid...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy 7 
> <email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_com@enemygadgets.com> wrote:
>> List of 6000 Linux C function calls and commands
>> ------------------------------------------------
>
>> http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/dir_all_alphabetic.html
>
>> Whoa! Unbelievable. All documented including which header files to use
>> when calling functions, and the data types of the functions.
>
>> Developers can use this to make ANY new computing system or distro.

"6000 Linux C function calls"

And here I have a 2-ton pile of nuts, bolts and brackets that people can use 
to build ANY new space station or aircraft carrier.


>
>> Many of these commands are immensely useful in fault finding
>> roles.
>
> Why don't you just read the man pages in an
> xterm like everybody else?
>

I like to print all of this out as a hardcopy reference. Usually I'll print 
all of this twice just in case I lose the first copy.

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

#802

On 2015-01-24, Ezekiel <zeke@nosuchemail.com> wrote:

> I like to print all of this out as a hardcopy reference. Usually
> I'll print all of this twice just in case I lose the first copy.

I'm sure you're joking, but I remember starting to do that once: print
out all of the Unix man pages to put in 3-ring binders.  I don't
remember if I got them all printed or not.  That was back when I was
using a serial terminal on with V7 on a PDP-11 (no networking, no X11)
There weren't nearly as many man pages back then, and opening a new
xterm to read a man page wasn't an option, but I quickly learned how
to live without hardcopy of man pages.

--
Grant

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

#803

Grant Edwards wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On 2015-01-24, Ezekiel <zeke@nosuchemail.com> wrote:
>
>> I like to print all of this out as a hardcopy reference. Usually
>> I'll print all of this twice just in case I lose the first copy.
>
> I'm sure you're joking, but I remember starting to do that once: print
> out all of the Unix man pages to put in 3-ring binders.  I don't
> remember if I got them all printed or not.  That was back when I was
> using a serial terminal on with V7 on a PDP-11 (no networking, no X11)
> There weren't nearly as many man pages back then, and opening a new
> xterm to read a man page wasn't an option, but I quickly learned how
> to live without hardcopy of man pages.

A friend who did a stint at AT&T many many years ago gave me a big thick
comb-bound "book" of man pages, with a permuted index.  Unfortunately, at
that time I was mostly stuck on DOS.

-- 
	You will remember, Watson, how the dreadful business of the
Abernetty family was first brought to my notice by the depth which the
parsley had sunk into the butter upon a hot day.
		-- Sherlock Holmes

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

#805

On Sun, 25 Jan 2015 06:42:55 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> Grant Edwards wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
> 
>> On 2015-01-24, Ezekiel <zeke@nosuchemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I like to print all of this out as a hardcopy reference. Usually
>>> I'll print all of this twice just in case I lose the first copy.
>>
>> I'm sure you're joking, but I remember starting to do that once: print
>> out all of the Unix man pages to put in 3-ring binders.  I don't
>> remember if I got them all printed or not.  That was back when I was
>> using a serial terminal on with V7 on a PDP-11 (no networking, no X11)
>> There weren't nearly as many man pages back then, and opening a new
>> xterm to read a man page wasn't an option, but I quickly learned how
>> to live without hardcopy of man pages.
> 
> A friend who did a stint at AT&T many many years ago gave me a big thick
> comb-bound "book" of man pages, with a permuted index.  Unfortunately, at
> that time I was mostly stuck on DOS.

Always yearning to become a *nix programmer but never really making
it.
Right Chris?
The story of your life only these days its working as a Windows QA
person.


-- 
flatfish+++

Linux: The Operating System That Put The City Of Munich Out Of
Business.
Before Switching To Linux Read This:
http://linuxfonts.narod.ru/why.linux.is.not.ready.for.the.desktop.current.html

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

#808

On 2015-01-25, Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote:
> Grant Edwards wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> On 2015-01-24, Ezekiel <zeke@nosuchemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I like to print all of this out as a hardcopy reference. Usually
>>> I'll print all of this twice just in case I lose the first copy.
>>
>> I'm sure you're joking, but I remember starting to do that once:
>> print out all of the Unix man pages to put in 3-ring binders.  I
>> don't remember if I got them all printed or not.  That was back
>> when I was using a serial terminal on with V7 on a PDP-11 (no
>> networking, no X11) There weren't nearly as many man pages back
>> then, and opening a new xterm to read a man page wasn't an option,
>> but I quickly learned how to live without hardcopy of man pages.
>
> A friend who did a stint at AT&T many many years ago gave me a big
> thick comb-bound "book" of man pages, with a permuted index.
> Unfortunately, at that time I was mostly stuck on DOS.

Those were pretty common back in the day.  I had a complete set of
those for BSD, a single-volume one for System-V, and another one for
MKS tookit (a port of ksh and System V command line tools for Dos).

--
Grant

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

#810

On 2015-01-25, Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 2015-01-25, Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote:
>> Grant Edwards wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>
>>> On 2015-01-24, Ezekiel <zeke@nosuchemail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I like to print all of this out as a hardcopy reference. Usually
>>>> I'll print all of this twice just in case I lose the first copy.
>>>
>>> I'm sure you're joking, but I remember starting to do that once:
>>> print out all of the Unix man pages to put in 3-ring binders.  I
>>> don't remember if I got them all printed or not.  That was back
>>> when I was using a serial terminal on with V7 on a PDP-11 (no
>>> networking, no X11) There weren't nearly as many man pages back
>>> then, and opening a new xterm to read a man page wasn't an option,
>>> but I quickly learned how to live without hardcopy of man pages.
>>
>> A friend who did a stint at AT&T many many years ago gave me a big
>> thick comb-bound "book" of man pages, with a permuted index.
>> Unfortunately, at that time I was mostly stuck on DOS.
>
> Those were pretty common back in the day.  I had a complete set of
> those for BSD, a single-volume one for System-V, and another one for
> MKS tookit (a port of ksh and System V command line tools for Dos).

    Back in the 90s I had printed manuals for the software that I used.

    These days it's considered a terribly quaint idea, especially among the 
younger people. Either a softcopy version is available (PDF,HTML) or it's much
easier to just search Google.

     I used to drag a big collection of paper around with my every where I 
went but I discontinued that.

-- 
    I should not be held hostage by your bad taste.                       |||
                                                                         / | \

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

#804

On Sun, 25 Jan 2015 03:44:05 +0000, Grant Edwards wrote:

> On 2015-01-24, Ezekiel <zeke@nosuchemail.com> wrote:
> 
>> I like to print all of this out as a hardcopy reference. Usually I'll
>> print all of this twice just in case I lose the first copy.
> 
> I'm sure you're joking, but I remember starting to do that once: print
> out all of the Unix man pages to put in 3-ring binders.  I don't
> remember if I got them all printed or not.  That was back when I was
> using a serial terminal on with V7 on a PDP-11 (no networking, no X11)
> There weren't nearly as many man pages back then, and opening a new
> xterm to read a man page wasn't an option, but I quickly learned how to
> live without hardcopy of man pages.

I suppose the modern equivalent would be to use a bash script to 
periodically feed all the manpages through man2html and write a chunk of 
PHP to act as a search/selection tool, but I can't think why anybody 
would do that when man+apropos works so well. Unless, of course, they had 
some sort of command-line phobia.


-- 
martin@   | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org       |

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

#806

"Grant Edwards" <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote in message 
news:ma1oq5$hch$1@reader1.panix.com...
> On 2015-01-24, Ezekiel <zeke@nosuchemail.com> wrote:
>
>> I like to print all of this out as a hardcopy reference. Usually
>> I'll print all of this twice just in case I lose the first copy.
>
> I'm sure you're joking,

Of course I'm joking. I actually print out three copies in case I lose both 
the original and the backup.


> but I remember starting to do that once: print
> out all of the Unix man pages to put in 3-ring binders.  I don't
> remember if I got them all printed or not.

I used to really like computer books back in the day. But now with all the 
reference material available via man pages and out on the web it's been ages 
since I've bought a computer book. The other problem for books is that 
things change so rapidly that a book is often out of date by the time it's 
released.


> That was back when I was
> using a serial terminal on with V7 on a PDP-11 (no networking, no X11)
> There weren't nearly as many man pages back then, and opening a new
> xterm to read a man page wasn't an option, but I quickly learned how
> to live without hardcopy of man pages.

I never used a PDP-11. My first *nix experience was with Ultrix running on a 
MicroVAX. It ran DEC-windows so opening up multiple terminals was trivial. I 
don't remember what the actual resolution was on the Ultrix workstations but 
the monitors seemed amazing compared to the typical PC monitor.

-- 
"The only version of SQL where I have heard of the (SQL) injection flaw is 
MSSQL. AFAIK, this only runs on Windows."

Ian Hilliard
Msg-ID: <4a8aeb49$1@news.x-privat.org>

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

#807

On Sunday January 25 2015 11:28, in comp.os.linux.embedded, "Ezekiel"
<zeke@nosuchemail.com> wrote:

> 
> "Grant Edwards" <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
> news:ma1oq5$hch$1@reader1.panix.com...
>> On 2015-01-24, Ezekiel <zeke@nosuchemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I like to print all of this out as a hardcopy reference. Usually
>>> I'll print all of this twice just in case I lose the first copy.
>>
>> I'm sure you're joking,
> 
> Of course I'm joking. I actually print out three copies in case I lose
> both the original and the backup.

Don't laugh too hard, book-printed versions of the Unix manpages are still
available from Prentice-Hall.


-- 
Lew Pitcher
"In Skills, We Trust"
PGP public key available upon request

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

#809

On 2015-01-25, Ezekiel <zeke@nosuchemail.com> wrote:
>
> "Grant Edwards" <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote in message 
> news:ma1oq5$hch$1@reader1.panix.com...
>> On 2015-01-24, Ezekiel <zeke@nosuchemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I like to print all of this out as a hardcopy reference. Usually
>>> I'll print all of this twice just in case I lose the first copy.
>>
>> I'm sure you're joking,
>
> Of course I'm joking. I actually print out three copies in case I lose both 
> the original and the backup.
>
>
>> but I remember starting to do that once: print
>> out all of the Unix man pages to put in 3-ring binders.  I don't
>> remember if I got them all printed or not.
>
> I used to really like computer books back in the day. But now with all the 
> reference material available via man pages and out on the web it's been ages 
> since I've bought a computer book. The other problem for books is that 
> things change so rapidly that a book is often out of date by the time it's 
> released.
>
>
>> That was back when I was
>> using a serial terminal on with V7 on a PDP-11 (no networking, no X11)
>> There weren't nearly as many man pages back then, and opening a new
>> xterm to read a man page wasn't an option, but I quickly learned how
>> to live without hardcopy of man pages.
>
> I never used a PDP-11. My first *nix experience was with Ultrix running on a 
> MicroVAX. It ran DEC-windows so opening up multiple terminals was trivial. I 
> don't remember what the actual resolution was on the Ultrix workstations but 
> the monitors seemed amazing compared to the typical PC monitor.

I remember switching from a VT-240 to a MicroVAX workstation.  I
thought I had died and gone to heaven.  Back then, there was a _huge_
difference between PC monitors (15" 1024x768 if you were _lucky_) and
Sun/Apollo/uVax workstations (usually 19-21" and _much_ higher
resolution).  If you did mainly coding and documentation, the
grayscale monitors for those workstations were _gorgeous_: larger and
higher resolution than the color options.  I stuck with grayscale on
Sun workstations until about 2000 when I switched to Linux. That was
definitly a big downgrade in display quality.  I don't think I had
anything equal to those old Sun grayscale monitors until many years
later when I bought a 20" Samsung 206BW 1680x1050 LCD.

--
Grant

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

#811

> Ezekiel wrote:
>>
>> I never used a PDP-11. My first *nix experience was with Ultrix running on a 
>> MicroVAX. It ran DEC-windows so opening up multiple terminals was trivial. I 
>> don't remember what the actual resolution was on the Ultrix workstations but 
>> the monitors seemed amazing compared to the typical PC monitor.

Hey, Ezekreep.  Tell us again how the GPL is hypocritical, as are all
FOSS developer and advocates who think it's a good and fair license.

-- 
'So complete freedom is doesn't actually matter - as long as you think
there are "enough freedoms."'  -  trolling fsckwit "Ezekiel",
attacking the GPL

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

#812

On Mon, 26 Jan 2015 07:12:05 -0600
chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> > Ezekiel wrote:
> >>
> >> I never used a PDP-11. My first *nix experience was with Ultrix
> >> running on a MicroVAX. It ran DEC-windows so opening up multiple
> >> terminals was trivial. I don't remember what the actual resolution
> >> was on the Ultrix workstations but the monitors seemed amazing
> >> compared to the typical PC monitor.
> 
> Hey, Ezekreep.  Tell us again how the GPL is hypocritical, as are all
> FOSS developer and advocates who think it's a good and fair license.
> 

You just said it well enough or are you Lying?

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

#813

On 2015-01-26, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>> Ezekiel wrote:
>>>
>>> I never used a PDP-11. My first *nix experience was with Ultrix running on a 
>>> MicroVAX. It ran DEC-windows so opening up multiple terminals was trivial. I 
>>> don't remember what the actual resolution was on the Ultrix workstations but 
>>> the monitors seemed amazing compared to the typical PC monitor.

    This was my late 80s experience with Sun Workstations as well.

    I never touched the actual hardware of a MicroVAX. Although I did use both
Ultrix and VMS.

-- 
     This is a consumer product.                                      |||
     World domination simply isn't necessary.                        / | \

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

#801

On Sat, 24 Jan 2015 18:10:57 +0000, owl wrote:

> In comp.os.linux.advocacy 7
> <email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_com@enemygadgets.com> wrote:
>> List of 6000 Linux C function calls and commands
>> ------------------------------------------------
> 
>> http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/dir_all_alphabetic.html
> 
>> Whoa! Unbelievable. All documented including which header files to use
>> when calling functions, and the data types of the functions.
> 
>> Developers can use this to make ANY new computing system or distro.
> 
>> May be a new banking device, or a TV device, or a gaming device,
>> or a robot gadget, or a Internet of Things product, or a new tablet, or
>> a  new smart watch, or a new 3D printer,
>> or a new digital camera, or a new digital telescope, or a new security
>> camera, etc etc etc.
> 
>> Also documented are all the common commands that may be run from bash
>> console such as ls, date, cp, etc.
>> These functions are easy enough to call from C program to make
>> exceptionally light work of very complex operatons without having to
>> write all that in C.
> 
>> Many of these commands are immensely useful in fault finding roles.
> 
> Why don't you just read the man pages in an xterm like everybody else?

and/or use 'apropos' of you're not sure of the command's name.

-- 
martin@   | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org       |

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

#799

On Sat, 24 Jan 2015 16:58:51 +0000
7 <email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_com@enemygadgets.com> wrote:

> List of 6000 Linux C function calls and commands
> ------------------------------------------------
> 
> http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/dir_all_alphabetic.html
> 
> Whoa! Unbelievable. All documented including which header files to use
> when calling functions, and the data types of the functions.
> 
> Developers can use this to make ANY new computing system or distro.
> 
> May be a new banking device, or a TV device, or a gaming device,
> or a robot gadget, or a Internet of Things product, or a 
> new tablet, or a  new smart watch, or a new 3D printer,
> or a new digital camera, or a new digital telescope, or
> a new security camera, etc etc etc.
> 
> Also documented are all the common commands that may be run
> from bash console such as ls, date, cp, etc.
> These functions are easy enough to call from C program
> to make exceptionally light work of very complex operatons
> without having to write all that in C.
> 
> Many of these commands are immensely useful in fault finding
> roles.


Thanks for that... Bookmarked.

This is *far* easier to read than the man pages, especially if you're not
really sure what you are looking for and just want to browse through.

-- 
W J G

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

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

csiph-web