Groups > linux.debian.user > #256611 > unrolled thread

Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin?

Started by	coreyh@free.fr
First post	2023-04-02 11:00 +0200
Last post	2023-04-03 19:50 +0200
Articles	20 on this page of 133 — 33 participants

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

  Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? coreyh@free.fr - 2023-04-02 11:00 +0200
    Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2023-04-02 11:10 +0200
    Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-02 11:30 +0200
      Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Jude DaShiell <jdashiel@panix.com> - 2023-04-02 11:50 +0200
      Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-03 00:20 +0200
      Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Steve Sobol <steve@LobosStudios.com> - 2023-04-03 00:20 +0200
    Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2023-04-02 18:40 +0200
      Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2023-04-02 18:40 +0200
        Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-02 19:20 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2023-04-02 20:50 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-02 21:00 +0200
              Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-02 21:20 +0200
                Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-02 21:30 +0200
                Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? debian-user@howorth.org.uk - 2023-04-03 00:00 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-03 00:10 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Steve Sobol <steve@LobosStudios.com> - 2023-04-03 01:10 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2023-04-03 04:30 +0200
                    Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-03 05:50 +0200
                      Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2023-04-03 06:50 +0200
                    Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2023-04-03 06:50 +0200
                Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2023-04-03 06:40 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-03 11:30 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 15:00 +0200
              Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2023-04-02 21:20 +0200
                Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2023-04-03 02:00 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Ken Young <ken@highwinds.cloud> - 2023-04-03 02:30 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2023-04-03 01:40 +0200
      Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-02 19:20 +0200
        Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? debian-user@howorth.org.uk - 2023-04-02 22:10 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-02 22:40 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Charles Curley <charlescurley@charlescurley.com> - 2023-04-02 23:20 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-02 22:50 +0200
        Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2023-04-03 01:20 +0200
      Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Michel Verdier <mv524@free.fr> - 2023-04-02 22:50 +0200
        Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Tom Browder <tom.browder@gmail.com> - 2023-04-02 23:10 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? coreyh@free.fr - 2023-04-03 06:30 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2023-04-03 06:50 +0200
              Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? coreyh@free.fr - 2023-04-03 07:00 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Stanislav Vlasov <stanislav.v.v@gmail.com> - 2023-04-03 08:50 +0200
              Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2023-04-03 09:30 +0200
                Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Michel Verdier <mv524@free.fr> - 2023-04-03 10:40 +0200
                Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Stanislav Vlasov <stanislav.v.v@gmail.com> - 2023-04-03 11:20 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Michel Verdier <mv524@free.fr> - 2023-04-03 13:00 +0200
              Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> - 2023-04-03 15:40 +0200
                Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Stanislav Vlasov <stanislav.v.v@gmail.com> - 2023-04-03 18:50 +0200
        Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Oliver Schoede <oliver.schode@online.de> - 2023-04-02 23:40 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-03 00:10 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2023-04-03 03:30 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2023-04-03 05:00 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-03 05:50 +0200
              Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2023-04-03 06:20 +0200
                Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-04 02:20 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? local10 <local10@tutanota.com> - 2023-04-04 05:40 +0200
                    Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2023-04-04 15:50 +0200
                      Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? local10 <local10@tutanota.com> - 2023-04-05 00:50 +0200
        Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Jude DaShiell <jdashiel@panix.com> - 2023-04-03 00:10 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-03 00:20 +0200
      Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2023-04-03 01:20 +0200
        Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-03 02:20 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Eduard Bloch <edi@gmx.de> - 2023-04-03 23:30 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Joel Roth <joelz@pobox.com> - 2023-04-04 00:30 +0200
              Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 16:20 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 16:00 +0200
              Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? rhkramer@gmail.com - 2023-04-08 16:30 +0200
                Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2023-04-08 18:30 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 18:40 +0200
                    Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 18:50 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> - 2023-04-08 19:50 +0200
                    Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? rhkramer@gmail.com - 2023-04-08 21:20 +0200
                      Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 21:40 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> - 2023-04-09 05:40 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Tom Dial <tddial@comcast.net> - 2023-04-04 04:00 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 16:20 +0200
              Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? davidson <davidson@freevolt.org> - 2023-04-08 16:50 +0200
                Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 17:10 +0200
              Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Tom Dial <tddial@comcast.net> - 2023-04-11 04:20 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 16:30 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2023-04-05 04:10 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 16:50 +0200
    Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2023-04-02 23:20 +0200
      Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? ghe2001 <ghe2001@protonmail.com> - 2023-04-02 23:40 +0200
        Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-02 23:50 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Michel Verdier <mv524@free.fr> - 2023-04-03 00:10 +0200
      Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-02 23:40 +0200
        Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2023-04-03 05:50 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-03 20:00 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-03 20:20 +0200
              Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Michel Verdier <mv524@free.fr> - 2023-04-03 20:50 +0200
                Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 15:20 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Michel Verdier <mv524@free.fr> - 2023-04-03 20:20 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2023-04-03 20:50 +0200
              Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Michel Verdier <mv524@free.fr> - 2023-04-03 21:00 +0200
                Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? davidson <davidson@freevolt.org> - 2023-04-08 05:50 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 15:40 +0200
              Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2023-04-03 22:00 +0200
                Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2023-04-03 22:10 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2023-04-03 22:30 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Michael <ml@hemathor.de> - 2023-04-05 12:00 +0200
                    Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Michael <ml@hemathor.de> - 2023-04-05 12:00 +0200
                    Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2023-04-05 12:10 +0200
                      Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2023-04-05 13:30 +0200
                        Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2023-04-05 13:40 +0200
                          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2023-04-05 14:00 +0200
                          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2023-04-05 14:20 +0200
                        Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2023-04-05 13:40 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2023-04-03 21:50 +0200
    Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2023-04-03 05:10 +0200
    Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2023-04-03 18:40 +0200
      Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Stanislav Vlasov <stanislav.v.v@gmail.com> - 2023-04-03 19:10 +0200
        Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Michel Verdier <mv524@free.fr> - 2023-04-03 19:40 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-03 19:50 +0200
      Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? debian-user@howorth.org.uk - 2023-04-03 19:20 +0200
        Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-03 19:50 +0200
      Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-03 19:40 +0200
        Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> - 2023-04-03 20:30 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 15:10 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2023-04-08 15:20 +0200
              Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 15:30 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2023-04-09 00:20 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? conover@panix.com (John Conover) - 2023-04-09 05:00 +0200
        Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2023-04-04 15:40 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2023-04-04 15:50 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2023-04-04 16:40 +0200
              Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? debian-user@howorth.org.uk - 2023-04-04 19:40 +0200
                Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2023-04-04 19:40 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2023-04-04 20:00 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2023-04-04 21:00 +0200
                    Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 16:40 +0200
                  Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 16:40 +0200
                Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 16:50 +0200
            Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 17:00 +0200
          Re: Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin? Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2023-04-08 17:10 +0200
      Computer anthropology and language wars [was: Is perl still the No.1  language for sysadmin?] <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2023-04-03 19:50 +0200

Page 6 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 Next page →

#256774

From	Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org>
Date	2023-04-05 13:30 +0200
Message-ID	<Gh9uV-hwFK-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to	#256773

On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 12:01:50PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote:
> 2. If you are relying on nonstandard shell constructs, then go directly
> for zsh and use recursive globbing and glob patterns.

bash has that, too -- you just have to enable it (shopt -s globstar),
as it's not enabled by default.

See also:
https://mywiki.wooledge.org/BashProgramming/03#Operating_on_files_in_bulk

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

#256775

From	<tomas@tuxteam.de>
Date	2023-04-05 13:40 +0200
Message-ID	<Gh9EB-hwJu-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to	#256774

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 01:37:31PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote:
> Greg Wooledge (12023-04-05):
> > bash has that, too -- you just have to enable it (shopt -s globstar),
> > as it's not enabled by default.
> 
> Ah, bash has recursive globbing, that is good to know. It does not have
> glob qualifiers nor temp file process substitution, AFAICS, though.

It does have <(...), too.

Cheers
-- 
t

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

#256778

From	Nicolas George <george@nsup.org>
Date	2023-04-05 14:00 +0200
Message-ID	<Gh9XX-hwRd-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to	#256775

tomas@tuxteam.de (12023-04-05):
> It does have <(...), too.

<(…) and >(…) are quite common, =(…) is significantly rarer.

Regards,

-- 
  Nicolas George

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

#256779

From	Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org>
Date	2023-04-05 14:20 +0200
Message-ID	<Ghahj-hxdI-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to	#256775

On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 01:39:27PM +0200, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 01:37:31PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote:
> > Greg Wooledge (12023-04-05):
> > > bash has that, too -- you just have to enable it (shopt -s globstar),
> > > as it's not enabled by default.
> > 
> > Ah, bash has recursive globbing, that is good to know. It does not have
> > glob qualifiers nor temp file process substitution, AFAICS, though.
> 
> It does have <(...), too.

But bash's <(...) is not guaranteed to be any particular thing.  Based
on the operating system bash was compiled for, it can be a named pipe,
or an anonymous pipe (/dev/fd/*), or *conceivably* a temporary file,
although I think that's only on platforms like Cygwin that lack FIFOs.

The inability to *easily* create and manage a temporary file is pretty
annoying sometimes.  It's especially annoying because you can observe
that the shell already *has* code to create temporary files (it uses
them for << and <<< for example), but doesn't let *you* use that code
on demand.

I believe Nicolas is saying that in zsh, <(...) is ALWAYS a pipe of
some kind (perhaps zsh can't be built on Cygwin -- I have no idea),
and that =(...) is ALWAYS a temporary file.  That kind of guarantee
could be useful.

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

#256776

From	Nicolas George <george@nsup.org>
Date	2023-04-05 13:40 +0200
Message-ID	<Gh9EB-hwJu-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to	#256774

Greg Wooledge (12023-04-05):
> bash has that, too -- you just have to enable it (shopt -s globstar),
> as it's not enabled by default.

Ah, bash has recursive globbing, that is good to know. It does not have
glob qualifiers nor temp file process substitution, AFAICS, though.

Glob qualifiers is when you write:

command *(.) for only regular files,

command *.c(mh-1) for only C files modified less than one hour ago,

command .*(@-@) for dotfiles that are broken links.

Temp file process substitution is when you cannot write

vimdiff reference.txt <(command)

because <(…) uses a pipe and vim doesn't like pipes, so you write

vimdiff reference.txt =(command)

to use a temporary file instead.

Regards,

-- 
  Nicolas George

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

#256709

From	David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com>
Date	2023-04-03 21:50 +0200
Message-ID	<GgylH-h8rx-11@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to	#256700

On 4/3/23 10:58, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> David Christensen wrote:
> 
>> # echo $PATH | tr ':' '\n' | perl -MFile::Slurp -ne
>>     'chomp;@e=read_dir($_,prefix=>1); print map "$_\n",@e'|xargs
>>     file|perl -pe 's/\S+\s+//'|grep -v 'symbolic link'|perl -pe
>>     's/, dynamically linked.+//'|sort|uniq -c|sort -rn
> 
> I'm still so impressed by this, I tried to run this but it
> seems I lack the Slurp module?


# apt-get install libfile-slurp-perl


> Also, if it isn't too much to ask, can you put it in the form
> of a script or shell function the way you would? It doesn't
> feel right for me to "indent your code" if you follow ...


2023-04-03 12:41:57 dpchrist@taz ~
$ cat bin/survey-path-file
#!/bin/sh
# $Id: survey-path-file,v 1.3 2023/04/03 19:41:56 dpchrist Exp $
# by David Paul Christensen dpchrist@holgerdanske.com
# Public Domain
#
# Run file(1) for files in PATH.  Count and print frequency of results.

echo $PATH \
| tr ':' '\n' \
| perl -MFile::Slurp -ne 'chomp;print map {"$_\n"} read_dir($_,prefix=>1)' \
| xargs file \
| perl -pe 's/\S+\s+//' \
| grep -v 'symbolic link' \
| perl -pe 's/, dynamically linked.+//' \
| sort \
| uniq -c \
| sort -rn

2023-04-03 12:41:59 dpchrist@taz ~
$ survey-path-file
    1490 ELF 64-bit LSB pie executable, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV)
     290 POSIX shell script, ASCII text executable
     145 Perl script text executable
      40 Python script, ASCII text executable
      24 setuid ELF 64-bit LSB pie executable, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV)
      18 ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV)
      18 Bourne-Again shell script, ASCII text executable
      14 setgid ELF 64-bit LSB pie executable, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV)
      14 Tcl script, ASCII text executable
       8 POSIX shell script, UTF-8 Unicode text executable
       6 ELF 64-bit LSB pie executable, x86-64, version 1 (GNU/Linux)
       4 Python script, UTF-8 Unicode text executable
       2 a /usr/bin/env sh script, ASCII text executable
       2 a /bin/mksh script, UTF-8 Unicode text executable
       2 Python script, ISO-8859 text executable
       2 POSIX shell script, ASCII text executable, with very long lines
       2 Java source, UTF-8 Unicode text
       2 ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (GNU/Linux)


David

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

#256660

From	Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net>
Date	2023-04-03 05:10 +0200
Message-ID	<GgiJX-gYGb-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to	#256611

Hello,

On Sun, Apr 02, 2023 at 04:59:15PM +0800, coreyh@free.fr wrote:
> I saw many commands in /bin and /usr/bin are written by perl.
> is perl still the first choice for sysadmin on linux?

I don't accept the premise that it ever was the first choice, and I
say that as someone who likes Perl and writes it nearly every day.

I think you should ask a better question, one that more precisely
covers what exactly it is that you want to know. Looking back at
most of your recent posts to this list I'd give that same advice in
response to many of them, I'm afraid.

Cheers,
Andy

-- 
https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting

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

#256691

From	Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com>
Date	2023-04-03 18:40 +0200
Message-ID	<GgvnP-h6Dv-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to	#256611

On Sun, Apr 2, 2023 at 4:59 AM <coreyh@free.fr> wrote:
>
> I saw many commands in /bin and /usr/bin are written by perl.
> is perl still the first choice for sysadmin on linux?

I am surprised this thread has not started a mini-flame war.

About the best you can say is, Perl is one of the more popular
scripting languages. Trying to pin down the "best" will fail because
it is opinion based.

Next, you might ask which is the best editor to use on Unix & Linux.
That should really stir the pot :) Emacs for the win!

Jeff

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

#256693

From	Stanislav Vlasov <stanislav.v.v@gmail.com>
Date	2023-04-03 19:10 +0200
Message-ID	<GgvQR-h73s-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to	#256691

2023-04-03 21:36 GMT+05:00, Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com>:

> Next, you might ask which is the best editor to use on Unix & Linux.
> That should really stir the pot :) Emacs for the win!

Emacs will not win, because this OS does not have good editor even
with M-x viper :-)
Used it at their 21-23 versions. It's not editor, it's really os and
in this os best mail/news reader.
You can config anything with it. But you will config everything in it.
After end of fidonet to news gate i was dropped emacs because too lazy
for every day configuration without stimul :-)

-- 
Stanislav

P.S. Now I use vi (not vim), vi (really vim-tiny), vim, mcedit (from
mc), or something installed by default, edit network settings and with
working network use puppet-like software, which configs/data edited by
Geany with git or directly in Gitlab webinterface. Not ideal, but
working.

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

#256695

From	Michel Verdier <mv524@free.fr>
Date	2023-04-03 19:40 +0200
Message-ID	<GgwjT-h7dP-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to	#256693

Le 3 avril 2023 Stanislav Vlasov a écrit :

> Used it at their 21-23 versions. It's not editor, it's really os and
> in this os best mail/news reader.

Gnus rules ! And Org too :)

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

#256698

From	Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org>
Date	2023-04-03 19:50 +0200
Message-ID	<Ggwtz-h7he-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to	#256695

Michel Verdier wrote:

>> Used it at their 21-23 versions. It's not editor, it's
>> really os and in this os best mail/news reader.
>
> Gnus rules!

Gnus is to Emacs users
what Emacs is to computer users.

  https://dataswamp.org/~incal/figures/gnus/gnus-gmane.png

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

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

#256694

From	debian-user@howorth.org.uk
Date	2023-04-03 19:20 +0200
Message-ID	<Ggw0x-h76T-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to	#256691

Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 2, 2023 at 4:59 AM <coreyh@free.fr> wrote:
> >
> > I saw many commands in /bin and /usr/bin are written by perl.
> > is perl still the first choice for sysadmin on linux?  
> 
> I am surprised this thread has not started a mini-flame war.

Me too, but I'm pleasantly surprised :) I'd say it's a mark of a good
community.
 
> About the best you can say is, Perl is one of the more popular
> scripting languages. Trying to pin down the "best" will fail because
> it is opinion based.

+1 (perl is best though :)
 
> Next, you might ask which is the best editor to use on Unix & Linux.
> That should really stir the pot :) Emacs for the win!

Ah no, that one's easy to answer - vi is what's guaranteed to be
installed everywhere, so vi it is. And I probably only use a tenth of
its features.

> Jeff

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

#256699

From	Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org>
Date	2023-04-03 19:50 +0200
Message-ID	<Ggwtz-h7he-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to	#256694

debian-user wrote:

> Ah no, that one's easy to answer - vi is what's guaranteed
> to be installed everywhere, so vi it is. And I probably only
> use a tenth of its features.

But Emacs is maximalist, as is Lisp.

We want everything!

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

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

#256696

From	Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org>
Date	2023-04-03 19:40 +0200
Message-ID	<GgwjT-h7dP-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to	#256691

Jeffrey Walton wrote:

>> I saw many commands in /bin and /usr/bin are written by
>> perl. is perl still the first choice for sysadmin on linux?
>
> I am surprised this thread has not started a mini-flame war.

We are working on it ...

> About the best you can say is, Perl is one of the more
> popular scripting languages. Trying to pin down the "best"
> will fail because it is opinion based.

I think the true professional should be able to read/edit both
and be pretty fluent in at least one. (Here, by professional
I mean in terms of skills and dedication, not necessarily
making a living doing it.) Perl is cooler and more old-school,
maybe ultimately more powerful and creative from what you guys
say about it, but if you don't know either I think the ease of
learning it, development speed, the volume of people doing it
and available resources to help you with that online, that
favors Python as the 1st choice.

> Next, you might ask which is the best editor to use on Unix
> & Linux. That should really stir the pot :) Emacs for
> the win!

You better believe it. It is based on Lisp!

But I have respect for the Vi(m) people as well, for sure, not
sure exactly what the currently prefered Vim-style editor
implementation is? neovim?

Here are the most popular channels on Libera right now.
See arrows for editors, unless I missed someone.

Emacs (position 16) has 854, Vim (22) has 705 and neovim (41)
490. However combined Vim has 1195 which would be position 6 -
overlap not considered ...

I you like that table (the enumeration), I made it with this:

  https://dataswamp.org/~incal/emacs-init/enum.el [yanked last]

Note the `cl-loop' at line 27 - I mentioned it earlier, CL
functionality implemented in Elisp - and note especially the
"unlispy" syntax - this as someone touched upon, that in Perl
you can do the same thing in different ways - here we see
a miniature language (the unlispy syntax, which is
imperative/procedural in style, only better), replicating the
behavior of another language CL, implemented by and used
in Elisp!

Still not convinced? Okay, use Vim, really, it's cool ...

 1. #linux           2184
 2. #fedora          1696
 3. #python          1688
 4. #libera          1577
 5. #archlinux       1474
 6. #ubuntu          1146
 7. #networking      1035
 8. ##rust            968
 9. #ansible          894
10. #security         884
11. #gentoo           875
12. #bash             867
13. #git              857
14. #c                857
15. #postgresql       856
16. #emacs            854  <-- Emacs
17. #debian           843
18. ##programming     760
19. #go-nuts          718
20. #openbsd          717
21. #freebsd          714
22. #vim              705  <-- Vim
23. #thelounge        705
24. #hardware         702
25. #haskell          680
26. #wireguard        668
27. #weechat          649
28. #lobsters         623
29. #plasma-bigscreen 613 
30. ##math            609
31. #matrix           608
32. #raspberrypi      580
33. #znc              578
34. #C++              573
35. #docker           556
36. #monero           530
37. #systemd          525
38. ##electronics     510
39. #podman           499
40. ##chat            495
41. #neovim           490  <-- neovim
42. #hamradio         485

;;; -*- lexical-binding: t -*-
;;
;; this file:
;;   https://dataswamp.org/~incal/emacs-init/enum.el

(require 'cl-lib)
(require 'subr-x)

(defun enum (&optional beg end suf)
  "Enumerate each line from BEG to END, counting from one.
Use SUF as a suffix to the digits inserted.
BEG defaults to the beginning of the buffer,
END defaults to the end of the buffer,
SUF defaults to \". \""
  (interactive
   `(,@(if (use-region-p)
           (list (region-beginning) (region-end))
         (list nil nil) )
     ,(when current-prefix-arg
        (read-string "suffix: ") )))
  (or beg (setq beg (point-min)))
  (or end (setq end (point-max)))
  (or suf (setq suf ". "))
  (goto-char beg)
  (let*((lines   (count-lines beg end))
        (pad-len (length (number-to-string lines))) )
    (cl-loop
      for line from 1 to lines
      do (goto-char (line-beginning-position))
         (insert
           (format "%s%s"
                   (string-pad (number-to-string line) pad-len nil t) suf) )
         (forward-line) )))

(provide 'enum)

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

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

#256703

From	"Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net>
Date	2023-04-03 20:30 +0200
Message-ID	<Ggx6h-h7Ke-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to	#256696

Hi,

Jeffrey Walton wrote:
> > I am surprised this thread has not started a mini-flame war.

Emanuel Berg wrote:
> We are working on it ...

Maybe i can help by stating that Perl and Python are among the largest
resource hogs known in the world of languages.

  https://storage.googleapis.com/cdn.thenewstack.io/media/2018/05/3730357d-results-energy-time-and-memory-usage-screenshot-from-research-paper.png
Image found on:
  https://thenewstack.io/which-programming-languages-use-the-least-electricity/

1.00 is best, higher numbers indicate wastefulness.

C has 1.00 for energy consumption and for processing time.
For memory needs it's at rank 3 with 1.17.
Perl has 79.58 for energy (rank 27 of 27), 65.79 for time (rank 25),
6.62 for memory (rank 23).
Python has 71.90 for energy (rank 26), 71.90 for time (rank 26),
2.80 for memory (rank 12).

Have a nice day :)

Thomas

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

#256866

From	Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org>
Date	2023-04-08 15:10 +0200
Message-ID	<Gigul-DoW-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to	#256703

Thomas Schmitt wrote:

>>> I am surprised this thread has not started
>>> a mini-flame war.
>>
>> We are working on it ...
>
> Maybe i can help by stating that Perl and Python are among
> the largest resource hogs known in the world of languages.

What, how do they know that, they do the same computation and
count CPU instructions? LOL

No, tell me ... it's interesting.

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

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

#256868

From	Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org>
Date	2023-04-08 15:20 +0200
Message-ID	<GigE1-Dst-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to	#256866

On Sat, Apr 08, 2023 at 02:57:42PM +0200, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> Thomas Schmitt wrote:
> 
> >>> I am surprised this thread has not started
> >>> a mini-flame war.
> >>
> >> We are working on it ...
> >
> > Maybe i can help by stating that Perl and Python are among
> > the largest resource hogs known in the world of languages.
> 
> What, how do they know that, they do the same computation and
> count CPU instructions? LOL

Benchmarking an entire language is not exactly a trivial undertaking,
nor is it entirely a sensible statement to make.  You run into a few
issues:

1) How do you choose what task to write programs for?

2) How do you ensure the programs you write in each language, for this
   benchmarking task, are the best possible programs?

Point 2 requires that you be an expert in all of the languages to be
benchmarked, or hire the services of language experts.

Point 1 at least offers you the opportunity to narrow your field of
study a bit.  You might make statements like "Language A is generally
faster than Language B at running Monte Carlo simulations of dice games"
which is much more meaningful than "Language A is a resource hog".

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

#256870

From	Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org>
Date	2023-04-08 15:30 +0200
Message-ID	<GigNH-DvO-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to	#256868

Greg Wooledge wrote:

>>>>> I am surprised this thread has not started
>>>>> a mini-flame war.
>>>>
>>>> We are working on it ...
>>>
>>> Maybe i can help by stating that Perl and Python are among
>>> the largest resource hogs known in the world of languages.
>> 
>> What, how do they know that, they do the same computation and
>> count CPU instructions? LOL
>
> Benchmarking an entire language is not exactly a trivial
> undertaking, nor is it entirely a sensible statement to
> make. You run into a few issues

Yes but it's easy to do and if done bad, one can say, here is
the problem :)

No, agree on solivng like a 100 tasks. Computation, math
stuff, but also random everyday stuff, translate all to binary
anyway so just come up with stuff. All the time, run Quake in
the background LOL

Then test for different stuff, make a list ... tada :)

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

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

#256924

From	Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net>
Date	2023-04-09 00:20 +0200
Message-ID	<Gip4B-IIK-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to	#256703

Hello,

On Mon, Apr 03, 2023 at 08:20:36PM +0200, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
> 1.00 is best, higher numbers indicate wastefulness.
> 
> C has 1.00 for energy consumption and for processing time.
> For memory needs it's at rank 3 with 1.17.
> Perl has 79.58 for energy (rank 27 of 27), 65.79 for time (rank 25),
> 6.62 for memory (rank 23).
> Python has 71.90 for energy (rank 26), 71.90 for time (rank 26),
> 2.80 for memory (rank 12).

It is almost as if one small set of metrics aren't enough to decide,
for everyone, in every case, which language should be used!

Similarly, the idea posted in this thread to objectively quantify
every feature a language can possibly have and then see which one
has the most, so we can dub that language "the best": This ignores
the fact that people have been doing research for 50+ years into
creating the academically perfect programming language. Even if any
group of people COULD agree objectively on those metrics, what
succeeds in the marketplace of ideas (and indeed, the literal
marketplace) would not be determined by those metrics alone.

I'm not saying it wouldn't be useful or interesting, but it's an
extremely narrow view of human behaviour.

Cheers,
Andy

-- 
https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting

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

#256930

From	conover@panix.com (John Conover)
Date	2023-04-09 05:00 +0200
Message-ID	<Gitrz-Lgg-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to	#256924

Andy Smith writes:
> 
> It is almost as if one small set of metrics aren't enough to decide,
> for everyone, in every case, which language should be used!
> 
> Similarly, the idea posted in this thread to objectively quantify
> every feature a language can possibly have and then see which one
> has the most, so we can dub that language "the best": This ignores
> the fact that people have been doing research for 50+ years into
> creating the academically perfect programming language. Even if any
> group of people COULD agree objectively on those metrics, what
> succeeds in the marketplace of ideas (and indeed, the literal
> marketplace) would not be determined by those metrics alone.
>

Yep. Remember BNF/EBNF/ABNF context free grammars?

    John

-- 

John Conover, conover@panix.com, http://www.johncon.com/

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

Page 6 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 Next page →

csiph-web

Is perl still the No.1 language for sysadmin?

Contents

#256774

#256775

#256778

#256779

#256776

#256709

#256660

#256691

#256693

#256695

#256698

#256694

#256699

#256696

#256703

#256866

#256868

#256870

#256924

#256930