Subtle difference, it's not a zero, it's a capital o.
Still doesn't work. My point stands: the command line options aren't standardised, and single character selectors don't easily map to such a complex scenario, so different implementors have chosen different approaches.
bash-2.05$ ps vOr usage: ps [ -aAdeflcjLPy ] [ -o format ] [ -t termlist ]
[ -u userlist ] [ -U userlist ] [ -G grouplist ]
[ -p proclist ] [ -g pgrplist ] [ -s sidlist ]
'format' is one or more of:
user ruser group rgroup uid ruid gid rgid pid ppid pgid sid taskid
pri opri pcpu pmem vsz rss osz nice class time etime stime
f s c lwp nlwp psr tty addr wchan fname comm args projid project pset
Isn't that what your mobile phone is for? Or do you know people who have always-on internet connectivity and don't have mobile phones? SMS is quite handy I'll agree, particularly when one half of the conversation is in intermittent connectivity. Is "Instant Messaging" an imitation of that?
In all but cost:
Mobile phone call: about 20 pence (30 cents US) per minute, plus about GBP 10 ($15 US) per month for line rental SMS messaging: about 7 pence (12 cents US) per ~30 word message, plus the same line rental as above Internet-based instant messaging/IRC: about GBP 10 ($15 US) per month for an Internet connection, totally free thereafter..
Just because you don't see a use doesn't mean it's useless. Quite the contrary, actually. Examples? Where it's so vitally important that you get the message through instantly, as opposed to waiting for (less than) 20 minutes for a cycle of emails to pass through a list server.
Sure. If I've got a technical problem that's going to take a lot of backwards and forwards transfer of information to solve, and don't know anyone nearby who is capable of solving it, then IRC is the perfect solution. Using a mailing list would probably take several hours to get a response (at least), whereas using IRC I can probably have the problem fixed within a few minutes. It's just a question of using the most efficient means to solve the problem at hand -- it doesn't (usually) *have* to be solved that quickly, but most of us are impatient.
Do you have evidence for that assertion, or are you just spouting off your own beliefs?
SF began as a way of writing stories that examined how new technology that was likely to become available might affect people's lives. SF has always been about people and the world they live in -- it's just that the world they live in is slightly different from the ones that their authors and readers lived in.
SF began with Mary Shelley's Frankenstein (or at least the general consensus is that it might have done). Go and read it, and then tell me that it isn't about "people and how they deal with the world around them".
ST and the world from Minority report are very similar in this approach. After analyzing the situation, I would not want to live in either world, yet people (and i assume the creators as well) believe these societies to be goals for the future.
ST, sure. But Minority Report? The idea behind that world was to send a disturbing message that what looks at first glance like Utopia could in actual fact be a terrible perversion of our goals that traps us in a reality we don't want to be in. You need to read more PKD.;)
(everyone has the same car? and like soviet russia, car drives you? what's up with that?)
Automatically driven cars are a useful idea, primarily because they could travel faster than manually driven cars without as many safety concerns, and would reduce congestion by decreasing gaps between vehicles. They would also likely be more energy efficient.
It has since been tweaked so that you could do it with nothing but gravity control and some negative-density matter.
The point is, it's FTL and doesn't contradict our understanding of how the universe works.
Except in that as far as we know, there's no such thing as "negative-density matter". But this hasn't stopped me from writing fiction that uses it, so I'm clearly not a Mundane writer.:)
There's still plenty of good hard sci-fi being produced these days. The first one that comes to mind is Kim Stanley Robinson's series about the colonization and terraforming of Mars (Red Mars, Blue Mars, and Green Mars).
I've only read Red Mars so far, but I think you're right. However, it isn't as modern as all that (I think it was written around 1990?).
Recent examples include Allen Steele's Coyote,
(SPOILERS BELOW!)
which examines colonisation of an extrasolar planet without using FTL travel. Note, however, that the existance of an FTL ship that arrives in the last part of the book would preclude this from being "Mundane SF".
List processses, order by memory consumption, saving 52 keypresses.
Doesn't work:
bash-2.05$ ps v0r usage: ps [ -aAdeflcjLPy ] [ -o format ] [ -t termlist ]
[ -u userlist ] [ -U userlist ] [ -G grouplist ]
[ -p proclist ] [ -g pgrplist ] [ -s sidlist ]
'format' is one or more of:
user ruser group rgroup uid ruid gid rgid pid ppid pgid sid taskid
pri opri pcpu pmem vsz rss osz nice class time etime stime
f s c lwp nlwp psr tty addr wchan fname comm args projid project pset
The problem is, those options to ps are not well standardised, and because there's no easy way of mapping all of the things ps can do into sensible single letter switches, every implementation there is uses them all for different things.
However, you can bet that every implementation of monad (and I'm sure there will be one for UNIX soon) will have similar names for the fields returned by get-process.
If you absolutely -must- sort out those that have less than n mem usage, try $ ps vOr | awk '{if ($8 > 15000) print $_ }'
Still 15 less characters than your example...
Sure, but: 'ps | where { $_.virt -gt 15000000}' is fewer still, and works just as well.
It's basically just a way to interact with your file system... Monad is a big step ahead for windows...
Talk about proving the quote right.
That's all bash is. That's all it does in linux too
The problem is, UNIX is built around an "everything's a file" abstraction, so having a file-based CLI works wonderfully for it. Windows doesn't really support that abstraction nearly as well, so for many essential system tasks you need non-file-based interfaces. MS have been starting to provide these with tools like netsh, but they're not there yet. This is what monad is supposed to address.
every use must be though at programming time (like GUI)
I'm not sure why you say this. Can you explain a little more? I would have thought that any use could be supported that can be done with the current system. If necessary, just fall back on objects containing a single string representing a line of text, and processing as you would currently, but I don't think there are many situations where this would be necessary.
S-expressions, while nasty for humans to work with, would be a reasonable interchange format.
As for cdrecord... come on. The fellow can be abrasive but I don't see how that's important here, and he can do what he wants with his code. He did license it under the GPL in the first place, which I for one appreciate, so we can use it and the extended DVD-supporting derivatives of it available in Linux distros. I don't see why him deciding *not* to give away *more* of his work draws such incredible indignation here. Sure, it'd be nice (FSF zealous would argue "morally required"), but really it's his work and his code.
What has irritated me are these things:
* The fact that he complained when people added their own DVD extensions into his software
* The fact that he advertises his DVD recording software as free for personal use, but distributes crippleware that requires a license key and doesn't provide any license keys (or at least, hasn't to me, despite the fact that I've followed the instructions at ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/cdrecord/ProDVD/README.ke y twice and requested assistance from him by e-mail once).
I encourage you all to download the beta and let us know how we are doing
Thanks. We might be able to help more if access to the beta was easier; many people here are cautious about giving their personal details to anyone, and the idea of a two day wait before we can start looking at it is a little offputting. Is there a faster and easier way of getting it?
Try reading the article. What they're providing here is nothing like bash, just as its nothing like the cmd.exe shell in current windows versions. It's an object-array-oriented, rather than stream-oriented shell. It's an interesting idea, and many of us are looking forward to seeing how it pans out. I also bet we'll be seeing similar ideas implemented for Linux in the near future.
That's just a cmd.exe (and explorer.exe) limitation.
The NT kernel fixed the backslash brokenness years ago.
Actually, both DOS and Windows have always allowed forward slash directory separators. Older versions of DOS even (apparently) had a config option that could change the command line option delimiter to '-' for system commands, so that you could use forward slashes in the arguments to them.
DOS started out its life as a version of CP/M for people with a UNIX background.
Let me think, Can you rotate, resize and compress a JPEG, GIF or PNG on the MS$ command line?
You can if you install the appropriate tools to do so, yes. Same as with any other OS with a command line system. I have ImageMagick on my system, so yes I can.
Can you do this ssh user@domain.com.
Yes, if you have ssh installed.
Can you run a firewall script from the cmd?
Depends what you mean by "firewall script". I don't really understand what you mean, but you might mean something like "netsh firewall set opmode enable", which is the command to turn the firewall on. There are similar commands for opening/closing ports, switching notifications on and off, and so on.
Can you chmod or chown?
You can use those exact commands if you've installed cygwin or something similar, or if you'd rather just use the default utilities, cacls can achieve just about anything you want.
I thought it was fairly obvious -- this works pretty much like piping data, except that instead of throwing text around, they're throwing structured objects instead.
So, in this case, the "get-process" commandlet's author determines what data is available in its output (same as the "ps" author determined the availble information under Unix).
Basically, it's just as flexible as text output and parsing, without the overhead of writing and debugging regexps/awk scripts to get the data you want, as it's available in a much easier-to-use way based on object structure.
The difference is that there are a whole bunch of standard data providers and consumers ("commandlets") distributed with the OS to make certain jobs easier. Plus, as it will be installed on every OS installation, it will (hopefully) become customary for app vendors who write programs that can provide tabular data to write them as commandlets, so you can easily access those. Because everything's based on structured data, it's much simpler than parsing out of a text format (that may not be very well defined) as you would have to when trying to interface with something that doesn't come with a python/ruby module.
Of course, the entire framework's written in.NET, so you ought to be able to access those same commandlets with IronPython, which is a plus point for those of us who know the language.:)
It looks a hell of a lot more like proper relational calculus than SQL -- and it should; the operations that it's designed to perform (taking tablse of objects, and filtering them so that you just have what you want) are the same problems that relational calculus was designed for.
It's a hell of a lot more flexible than SQL which is severely restricted by its arcane syntax.
...projecting Braille dots so blind people can read machine text instead of having it read to them by some text-to-speech program?
Braille terminals have been available since, like, forever. It's only modern GUI systems that have excluded blind users with inherently visual interfaces.
Slashdot Mirror
ps vOr
not
ps v0r
Subtle difference, it's not a zero, it's a capital o.
Still doesn't work. My point stands: the command line options aren't standardised, and single character selectors don't easily map to such a complex scenario, so different implementors have chosen different approaches.
bash-2.05$ ps vOr
usage: ps [ -aAdeflcjLPy ] [ -o format ] [ -t termlist ]
[ -u userlist ] [ -U userlist ] [ -G grouplist ]
[ -p proclist ] [ -g pgrplist ] [ -s sidlist ]
'format' is one or more of:
user ruser group rgroup uid ruid gid rgid pid ppid pgid sid taskid
pri opri pcpu pmem vsz rss osz nice class time etime stime
f s c lwp nlwp psr tty addr wchan fname comm args projid project pset
Isn't that what your mobile phone is for? Or do you know people who have always-on internet connectivity and don't have mobile phones?
SMS is quite handy I'll agree, particularly when one half of the conversation is in intermittent connectivity. Is "Instant Messaging" an imitation of that?
In all but cost:
Mobile phone call: about 20 pence (30 cents US) per minute, plus about GBP 10 ($15 US) per month for line rental
SMS messaging: about 7 pence (12 cents US) per ~30 word message, plus the same line rental as above
Internet-based instant messaging/IRC: about GBP 10 ($15 US) per month for an Internet connection, totally free thereafter..
Just because you don't see a use doesn't mean it's useless. Quite the contrary, actually.
Examples? Where it's so vitally important that you get the message through instantly, as opposed to waiting for (less than) 20 minutes for a cycle of emails to pass through a list server.
Sure. If I've got a technical problem that's going to take a lot of backwards and forwards transfer of information to solve, and don't know anyone nearby who is capable of solving it, then IRC is the perfect solution. Using a mailing list would probably take several hours to get a response (at least), whereas using IRC I can probably have the problem fixed within a few minutes. It's just a question of using the most efficient means to solve the problem at hand -- it doesn't (usually) *have* to be solved that quickly, but most of us are impatient.
Do you have evidence for that assertion, or are you just spouting off your own beliefs?
SF began as a way of writing stories that examined how new technology that was likely to become available might affect people's lives. SF has always been about people and the world they live in -- it's just that the world they live in is slightly different from the ones that their authors and readers lived in.
SF began with Mary Shelley's Frankenstein (or at least the general consensus is that it might have done). Go and read it, and then tell me that it isn't about "people and how they deal with the world around them".
ST and the world from Minority report are very similar in this approach. After analyzing the situation, I would not want to live in either world, yet people (and i assume the creators as well) believe these societies to be goals for the future.
;)
ST, sure. But Minority Report? The idea behind that world was to send a disturbing message that what looks at first glance like Utopia could in actual fact be a terrible perversion of our goals that traps us in a reality we don't want to be in. You need to read more PKD.
(everyone has the same car? and like soviet russia, car drives you? what's up with that?)
Automatically driven cars are a useful idea, primarily because they could travel faster than manually driven cars without as many safety concerns, and would reduce congestion by decreasing gaps between vehicles. They would also likely be more energy efficient.
It has since been tweaked so that you could do it with nothing but gravity control and some negative-density matter.
:)
The point is, it's FTL and doesn't contradict our understanding of how the universe works.
Except in that as far as we know, there's no such thing as "negative-density matter". But this hasn't stopped me from writing fiction that uses it, so I'm clearly not a Mundane writer.
There's still plenty of good hard sci-fi being produced these days. The first one that comes to mind is Kim Stanley Robinson's series about the colonization and terraforming of Mars (Red Mars, Blue Mars, and Green Mars).
I've only read Red Mars so far, but I think you're right. However, it isn't as modern as all that (I think it was written around 1990?).
Recent examples include Allen Steele's Coyote,
(SPOILERS BELOW!)
which examines colonisation of an extrasolar planet without using FTL travel. Note, however, that the existance of an FTL ship that arrives in the last part of the book would preclude this from being "Mundane SF".
Um, trip master monkey... you're sig is retarded.
Kettle, this is pot calling...
Sure, but: 'ps | where { $_.virt -gt 15000000}' is fewer still, and works just as well.
/. ate my tab.
Oops, I meant 'ps | where { $_.virt[TAB] -gt 15000000}', but
$ ps vOr
List processses, order by memory consumption, saving 52 keypresses.
Doesn't work:
bash-2.05$ ps v0r
usage: ps [ -aAdeflcjLPy ] [ -o format ] [ -t termlist ]
[ -u userlist ] [ -U userlist ] [ -G grouplist ]
[ -p proclist ] [ -g pgrplist ] [ -s sidlist ]
'format' is one or more of:
user ruser group rgroup uid ruid gid rgid pid ppid pgid sid taskid
pri opri pcpu pmem vsz rss osz nice class time etime stime
f s c lwp nlwp psr tty addr wchan fname comm args projid project pset
The problem is, those options to ps are not well standardised, and because there's no easy way of mapping all of the things ps can do into sensible single letter switches, every implementation there is uses them all for different things.
However, you can bet that every implementation of monad (and I'm sure there will be one for UNIX soon) will have similar names for the fields returned by get-process.
If you absolutely -must- sort out those that have less than n mem usage, try
$ ps vOr | awk '{if ($8 > 15000) print $_ }'
Still 15 less characters than your example...
Sure, but: 'ps | where { $_.virt -gt 15000000}' is fewer still, and works just as well.
Why is everyone immediately saying cygwin? Windows Services for Unix is the official release of ksh for Windows.
'cause 95% of us think that ksh is a horrible, horrible shell, and that bash "rulez".
It's basically just a way to interact with your file system... Monad is a big step ahead for windows...
Talk about proving the quote right.
That's all bash is. That's all it does in linux too
The problem is, UNIX is built around an "everything's a file" abstraction, so having a file-based CLI works wonderfully for it. Windows doesn't really support that abstraction nearly as well, so for many essential system tasks you need non-file-based interfaces. MS have been starting to provide these with tools like netsh, but they're not there yet. This is what monad is supposed to address.
and Microsoft has their own product, free download,
Oh, SFU noob.
every use must be though at programming time (like GUI)
I'm not sure why you say this. Can you explain a little more? I would have thought that any use could be supported that can be done with the current system. If necessary, just fall back on objects containing a single string representing a line of text, and processing as you would currently, but I don't think there are many situations where this would be necessary.
S-expressions, while nasty for humans to work with, would be a reasonable interchange format.
As for cdrecord ... come on. The fellow can be abrasive but I don't see how that's important here, and he can do what he wants with his code. He did license it under the GPL in the first place, which I for one appreciate, so we can use it and the extended DVD-supporting derivatives of it available in Linux distros. I don't see why him deciding *not* to give away *more* of his work draws such incredible indignation here. Sure, it'd be nice (FSF zealous would argue "morally required"), but really it's his work and his code.
e y twice and requested assistance from him by e-mail once).
What has irritated me are these things:
* The fact that he complained when people added their own DVD extensions into his software
* The fact that he advertises his DVD recording software as free for personal use, but distributes crippleware that requires a license key and doesn't provide any license keys (or at least, hasn't to me, despite the fact that I've followed the instructions at ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/cdrecord/ProDVD/README.k
a port of a similar linux app. already exists for win32
Have you read the article? This is nothing like cygwin/bash.
I encourage you all to download the beta and let us know how we are doing
Thanks. We might be able to help more if access to the beta was easier; many people here are cautious about giving their personal details to anyone, and the idea of a two day wait before we can start looking at it is a little offputting. Is there a faster and easier way of getting it?
Try reading the article. What they're providing here is nothing like bash, just as its nothing like the cmd.exe shell in current windows versions. It's an object-array-oriented, rather than stream-oriented shell. It's an interesting idea, and many of us are looking forward to seeing how it pans out. I also bet we'll be seeing similar ideas implemented for Linux in the near future.
That's just a cmd.exe (and explorer.exe) limitation.
The NT kernel fixed the backslash brokenness years ago.
Actually, both DOS and Windows have always allowed forward slash directory separators. Older versions of DOS even (apparently) had a config option that could change the command line option delimiter to '-' for system commands, so that you could use forward slashes in the arguments to them.
DOS started out its life as a version of CP/M for people with a UNIX background.
Let me think, Can you rotate, resize and compress a JPEG, GIF or PNG
on the MS$ command line?
You can if you install the appropriate tools to do so, yes. Same as with any other OS with a command line system. I have ImageMagick on my system, so yes I can.
Can you do this ssh user@domain.com.
Yes, if you have ssh installed.
Can you run a firewall script from the cmd?
Depends what you mean by "firewall script". I don't really understand what you mean, but you might mean something like "netsh firewall set opmode enable", which is the command to turn the firewall on. There are similar commands for opening/closing ports, switching notifications on and off, and so on.
Can you chmod or chown?
You can use those exact commands if you've installed cygwin or something similar, or if you'd rather just use the default utilities, cacls can achieve just about anything you want.
I thought it was fairly obvious -- this works pretty much like piping data, except that instead of throwing text around, they're throwing structured objects instead.
So, in this case, the "get-process" commandlet's author determines what data is available in its output (same as the "ps" author determined the availble information under Unix).
Basically, it's just as flexible as text output and parsing, without the overhead of writing and debugging regexps/awk scripts to get the data you want, as it's available in a much easier-to-use way based on object structure.
The difference is that there are a whole bunch of standard data providers and consumers ("commandlets") distributed with the OS to make certain jobs easier. Plus, as it will be installed on every OS installation, it will (hopefully) become customary for app vendors who write programs that can provide tabular data to write them as commandlets, so you can easily access those. Because everything's based on structured data, it's much simpler than parsing out of a text format (that may not be very well defined) as you would have to when trying to interface with something that doesn't come with a python/ruby module.
.NET, so you ought to be able to access those same commandlets with IronPython, which is a plus point for those of us who know the language. :)
Of course, the entire framework's written in
It looks a hell of a lot more like proper relational calculus than SQL -- and it should; the operations that it's designed to perform (taking tablse of objects, and filtering them so that you just have what you want) are the same problems that relational calculus was designed for.
It's a hell of a lot more flexible than SQL which is severely restricted by its arcane syntax.
OK, managed to get in. But it says this:
.torrent?
You the need to enter your details and you should get beta details back within a couple of days with site access to the MSH bits.
Fuck that. Anyone got a
This is all very interesting, but where do I get a copy? The blog that the poster linked to is seriously slashdotted.
...projecting Braille dots so blind people can read machine text instead of having it read to them by some text-to-speech program?
Braille terminals have been available since, like, forever. It's only modern GUI systems that have excluded blind users with inherently visual interfaces.