| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Comments:
<0> or you could install vnstat
<0> thats the most basic graphed based infos on your system bandwidth usage
<0> http://humdi.net/vnstat/
<1> Routermen: I need it to be console only and I'm using debian
<0> console only ?
<2> the "watch" command is console based
<0> yes vnstat works on consule
<1> ahh I installed nload and got what I wanted :)
<2> Routermen: how are ya?
<0> Cognition: alittle sleepy .. but i'm okay :) what about you ?
<2> Routermen: i'm good. I've got something to show you ...
<0> ok
<2> http://women.debian.org/
<0> checkin
<0> huhu .. interesting :)
<0> thanks Cognition
<2> anytime :)
<2> Routermen: do you work on DB position?
<2> DBA that is
<3> Can anyone suggest which version of linux I should download? I have never used it before, but I want to learn quickly and I am experienced with programming. I only really need it for programming in java, media playing and internet access. Any ideas?
<4> Stwange: you know java, so you should know it doesn't make any difference!!
<2> Stwange: http://distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resource=major
<4> java aside. I have seen people recommend gentoo
<4> but what distro to use has nothing whatsoever to do with java
<4> java doesn't even run using linux stuff, it runs on a JVM that runs on linux
<4> the JVM uses linux stuff
<3> yeah I know about the OS not mattering, but I didn't want to presume there weren't any restrictions with some versions
<4> (I guess the JVM uses linux stuff. maybe just machine code)
<4> Stwange: not on java there isn't
<4> i doubt there are restrictions either
<4> outside of java. maybe only on a really bad distro
<4> in theory
<3> so the version shouldn't matter at all for anything?
<3> what versions do you guys use?
<2> Stwange: it's not a version, it's a distribution. Read the link that i gave you.
<5> Web hosting is good on Linux or WIndows?
<3> I am reading it
<3> there doesn't seem to be too much between them on eye-level
<2> sAtAn|c^sOuL: The question is inaccurate and blurry at best. Web hosting is good depending on many factors, not the most pertinent of them is the OS
<2> Stwange: they are all good distros. Most of the decisions are based on factors such as personal preference and experience.
<6> Cognition: well as long as it's not windows then yes i wouldn't be choosy about the OS
<3> I'm going to go for Mandriva for now, until I get some more experience, and then go for Slackware or BSD
<3> thanks
<4> does anybody here think that for Media, windows is better?
<7> <--
<4> no doubt all here say linux has a better command line.. But if dealing with media, I haven't heard linux's features so complemented!
<4> jeian: tx !
<2> FredPitcher2: my mplayer supports more codecs than those supported by WMP. However, once again, the media is not related to the OS, but rather the specific media software, which is developed for both windows and linux
<6> FredPitcher2: be more specific. media performance? compatibility? DRM support? what
<6> i'd prefer a linux platform for performance and compatibility reasons
<6> and i've already decided that if anyone DRMs their media, they do not wish for me to see it
<6> so for me using linux for that makes a lot of sense
<4> causality: no idea. Stwange said " I only really need it for programming in java, media playing and internet access. Any ideas?"
<6> dunno what stwange said but for that question you have to evaluate your own needs
<4> well, i don't have any! I hate media!!
<6> then your question confuses me.
<4> just ag eneral question. in my mind media is playing sound and short video clips. And maybe *maybe*! somebody might be video editting
<2> Linux is more than just a usage option. It has its own philosophy and target audience. For most people, windows is a better option because it is easier to use, and because most of those users have little if any technical knowledge, and don't care about security
<4> to diverge a little.. isn't part of the unix philosophy that a command shoudl do what it does well..
<4> so, shouldn't ls be able to display hidden files? e.g. only files beginning with . ?
<4> i'm sure i recall a problem with it
<2> Switching linux require more than just wanting features, because these features are all available on windows. Thus, switching is based on two main reasons. One is saving money by avoiding proprietary software, and two, enjoying the power and flexibility and security of the system.
<4> and had to use the find command
<2> FredPitcher2: it's not too hard to type ls -a
<4> well, that displays . and ..
<4> what if I just want hidden files!
<4> and that displays ALL files
<4> so certainly not what I want!
<2> FredPitcher2: then you can search based on the regex p***ed to a grep pipe
<4> heh
<4> exactly, something like that..
<4> but in windows, the command to list files is dir, and sensibly it has a way to display ALL or Only hidden, e.t.c.
<4> i am new to linux. was learning it a few weeks ago, then i got and have jury service, and will get into it again afterwards! But I did one into a few things like that
<4> did one=did run
<2> if you're not willing to be knowledgable about shell usage, then perhaps you shouldn't use it. The example you provided is very trivial and one that i don't even think about. Try advanced scripting or processing script with sed and awk, and you'll see that you have to know those essential tools
<4> that's true
<4> of course, and I am willing to take it further..
<4> my argument is not that linux is weak
<2> and now that i think of it .. here is a solution to your hidden files problem
<2> ls -ad .*
<4> find ? ls and grep ? hmm.
<4> well, that still displays . and ..
<2> so?
<4> and since ls is recursive, that means it'll do ls . and ls ..
<4> so it's really a lot more than I want
<2> two more entries is not a lot more
<4> it won't list the directories, i see your point there
<2> besides, i won't use DOS for ****. It's a ****ty software with an even ****tier software built on top of it. As a power user, i prefer the complexity, and having more options in BASH
<2> i hate those "you forgot to wipe your ***... OK / Cancel" kind of dialogs
<4> Cognition: echo y | <-- though i see what you mean - extra keystrokes
<4> but not really. there are usually switches to cause no confirmation
<2> FredPitcher2: not unless you fool around with the registry, even then, there are many limitations.
<4> dos had a nice deltree command. linux's rmdir tells you it won't delete a directory 'cos it's not empty!! you have to add a switch
<4> Cognition: eh? with dos? fool with the registry? i mean some comands have switches to remove comfirmation
<2> FredPitcher2: rm -Rf doesn't soudn hard to me
<4> fine, and i'm saying that in DOS you can add switches to remove confirmation
<4> that's not the registry
<4> what are you referring to?
<2> FredPitcher2: i'm talking about windows, annoying dialogs are in windows, not DOS
<4> oh of course
<4> i wasn't talking about doing things with the windows gui
<4> but the windows command prompt
<4> DOS is more powerful with files than the windows gui
<4> so of course linux is!!
<2> Anyway, that's a long discussion, i made up my mind long ago, it's up to you to choose that which suites you better
<4> hey, i'm not saying the windows command prompt is better than linux
<4> I am saying that some commands can do some more basic stuff, better
<4> dir with wildcards doesn't have the complexity of being recursive
<4> it was a while since i messed with linux.. i'll get back to it. ls bothered me a bit with some annoyances, trivial stuff, but i figured out workaroudns
<2> recursion occurs when you enter subdirectories, anyway, as i said, it's up to you to make up your mind, i'm frankly not interested in pursuing this discussion further
<4> fine!
<8> hi
<4> but I musut add that i've made my mind up too
<4> as i said.. linux is more powerful
<8> I've just ran lsdel, then looped through every inode listed as being deleted today, non of them can be found (ncheck, cat, dump etc) is that normal ?
<8> i tested a few by hand too
<4> suppose you want to know how many hidden files in a directory... would you do ls -a | wc -l <-- and then subtract 2 ?
<4> I mean, ls -ad .* | wc -l <-- and then subtract 2 ?
<8> wont that be recursive ?
<1> you know ls -A shows dirlist w/o the . and ..
<4> oh, good point.. But will it coutner the .* ?
<4> GlenneMannen: ah, it won't!
<4> ls -A .* will not remove the . and ..
<1> hmm
<4> and furthermore, if ls can't do that , is that so in line with good unix philosophy?
<1> FredPitcher2: ls -Ad .* | grep .[:alpha:] try that
<4> yeah, I know that works. and you don't need -A either
<4> i'm just talking about minimizing keystrokes. and that ls won't do it on its own
<4> I certainly was not saying it was impossible in linux!
<1> okok
<4> I guess i shouldn't have asked. I got all the linux experts upset ;-)
<4> well, I think they got upset when I brought up about he dir command...
<4> anyhow, gnight!
<9> any body know that we say proxy server in linux ?
<7> A... proxy server?
<0> http://www.hoax-slayer.com/olympic-torch-virus-hoax.html
<0> FYI
<0> http://us.mcafee.com/virusInfo/default.asp?id=description&virus_k=98893
<2> Routermen: planning on becoming a Debian-women member anytime soon?
<10> whatalife: no. not here.
<0> Cognition: i'm not that good :) .. yet
<2> Routermen: i don't think any of those girls are developers
<2> Routermen: what's your job title, are you a DBA?
<0> no i'm a sys admin
<2> Routermen: sys-admin for what system?
<0> Cognition: linuxes , as/400 , z890 , hp ux
<2> Routermen: kick ***, and they pay you money for that :) that's like a fun job for me
<0> Cognition: believe me its not as fun as it seems .. especially when things goes wrong
<10> what?
<10> Routermen: mvs? or zOS?
Return to
#linux
or
Go to some related
logs:
Stari chal google
#php
#chat-world
#linux
#india
make a pie eat a pie
pidhat chat
CaeSpock
#worldchat
#worldchat
|
|