Re: Console on Sourceforge with Cygwin

Re: Console on Sourceforge with Cygwin

[One Angry User]

On a drizzly Tuesday, the 29th day of August, 2006, Keith Christian's computer deigned to emit the following stream of bytes:

> > It's hosted on SourceForge, try the latest v2 beta (not demo!)
> >
> > http://sourceforge.net/projects/console
>
> I just downloaded Console Beta 125 - Sorry, a little dense here, how do
> you invoke it from Windows to launch a Cygwin bash shell?  Do you have a
> couple of example command lines to use?
>
> Could you provide one example for a user that would start with "Click
> Start/Run and type the following command"

Oh, no, it doesn't work like that.  Command-line options are for wimps who
read manpages!  Console uses menus!  MENUS, man!  Now, there's real
configurability!

Besides, why would you want to launch a Cygwin bash shell if you can play
with all those colors for the command prompt?

OAU

RE: Console on Sourceforge with Cygwin

[Charli Li]

One Angry User screams at Keith Christian:
>On a drizzly Tuesday, the 29th day of August, 2006, Keith
>Christian's computer deigned to emit the following stream of bytes:
>
>> > It's hosted on SourceForge, try the latest v2 beta (not demo!)
>> >
>> > http://sourceforge.net/projects/console
>>
>> I just downloaded Console Beta 125 - Sorry, a little dense here, how do
>> you invoke it from Windows to launch a Cygwin bash shell?  Do you have a
>> couple of example command lines to use?
>>
>> Could you provide one example for a user that would start with "Click
>> Start/Run and type the following command"
>
>Oh, no, it doesn't work like that.  Command-line options are for wimps who
>read manpages!  Console uses menus!  MENUS, man!  Now, there's real
>configurability!
>
>Besides, why would you want to launch a Cygwin bash shell if you can play
>with all those colors for the command prompt?
>
>OAU
>

YEAH!  I think playing with the program, not actually using it, is better
than using it!

*sip*

Charli
---
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOYEAH!

Re: Console on Sourceforge with Cygwin

[Igor Peshansky]

On Tue, 29 Aug 2006, One Angry User wrote:

> Oh, no, it doesn't work like that.  Command-line options are for wimps
> who read manpages!  Console uses menus!  MENUS, man!  Now, there's real
> configurability!

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006, S. William Schulz wrote:

> Open Console, then Edit | Settings.  On the Console tab/page, I changed
> the shell to my Cygwin bat and the startup dir to my cygwin dir

LOL!

*sip*

	Igor
-- 
				http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
      |\      _,,,---,,_	    pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu | igor@watson.ibm.com
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		Igor Peshansky, Ph.D. (name changed!)
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		old name: Igor Pechtchanski
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

"Las! je suis sot... -Mais non, tu ne l'es pas, puisque tu t'en rends compte."
"But no -- you are no fool; you call yourself a fool, there's proof enough in
that!" -- Rostand, "Cyrano de Bergerac"

Re: Console on Sourceforge with Cygwin

[mwoehlke]

One Angry User wrote:
> On a drizzly Tuesday, the 29th day of August, 2006, Keith Christian's computer deigned to emit the following stream of bytes:
> 
>>> It's hosted on SourceForge, try the latest v2 beta (not demo!)
>>>
>>> http://sourceforge.net/projects/console
>> I just downloaded Console Beta 125 - Sorry, a little dense here, how do
>> you invoke it from Windows to launch a Cygwin bash shell?  Do you have a
>> couple of example command lines to use?
>>
>> Could you provide one example for a user that would start with "Click
>> Start/Run and type the following command"
> 
> Oh, no, it doesn't work like that.  Command-line options are for wimps who
> read manpages!  Console uses menus!  MENUS, man!  Now, there's real
> configurability!

Sigh.

Command line options are wonderful... for console programs. GUI's are 
for writing apps such that settings can be discovered /without/ having 
to resort to the doc. I suppose you think Firefox, Thunderbird, IE, etc. 
need manpages, and should only be configurable via command-line 
switches? This means of course that you can't change settings on the 
fly. That would be too convenient, and WJM after all.

-- 
Matthew
Now where did I put my hippo?

RE: Console on Sourceforge with Cygwin

[Dave Korn]

On 30 August 2006 16:19, mwoehlke wrote:

> One Angry User wrote:
>> On a drizzly Tuesday, the 29th day of August, 2006, Keith Christian's
>> computer deigned to emit the following stream of bytes: 

>>> Could you provide one example for a user that would start with "Click
>>> Start/Run and type the following command"
>> 
>> Oh, no, it doesn't work like that.  Command-line options are for wimps who
>> read manpages!  Console uses menus!  MENUS, man!  Now, there's real
>> configurability!
> 
> Sigh.
> 
> Command line options are wonderful... for console programs. GUI's are
> for writing apps such that settings can be discovered /without/ having
> to resort to the doc. I suppose you think Firefox, Thunderbird, IE, etc.
> need manpages, and should only be configurable via command-line
> switches? 

  It's not as orthogonal as all that.  Sometimes a GUI program isn't just a
GUI program.  Sometimes, even though it has a GUI, all you want to do is
script it - at which point, you *have* to have command-line options.

  So, command line options are wonderful for GUI programs *as well as* console
programs.  After all, consider the ever-popular post that goes ...

  "Hi, can anyone tell me what command-line options I can use to get setup.exe
to do a completely unattended installation and choose a selection of
packages?"

  Oops, I just said it.

  *sip*

  <heh>

    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

Re: Console on Sourceforge with Cygwin

[Owen Rees]

--On 30 August 2006 10:18 -0500 mwoehlke wrote:

> I suppose you think Firefox, Thunderbird, IE, etc. need manpages, and
> should only be configurable via command-line switches?

Not 'only' but I would find life harder without the "-a firefox" and 
"-remote ..." command line options to mozilla that let me do things from 
scripts. The man page for mozilla is not great, but at least it exists and 
points to a web page with some information.

-- 
Owen Rees
Hewlett Packard Laboratories, Bristol, UK

RE: Console on Sourceforge with Cygwin

[Buchbinder, Barry (NIH/NIAID) [E]]

Dave Korn wrote:
> On 30 August 2006 16:19, mwoehlke wrote:
> 
>> One Angry User wrote:
>>> On a drizzly Tuesday, the 29th day of August, 2006, Keith
>>> Christian's computer deigned to emit the following stream of bytes:
> 
>>>> Could you provide one example for a user that would start with
>>>> "Click Start/Run and type the following command"
>>> 
>>> Oh, no, it doesn't work like that.  Command-line options are for
>>> wimps who read manpages!  Console uses menus!  MENUS, man!  Now,
>>> there's real configurability!
>> 
>> Sigh.
>> 
>> Command line options are wonderful... for console programs. GUI's are
>> for writing apps such that settings can be discovered /without/
>> having to resort to the doc. I suppose you think Firefox,
>> Thunderbird, IE, etc. need manpages, and should only be configurable
>> via command-line switches?
> 
>   It's not as orthogonal as all that.  Sometimes a GUI program isn't
> just a GUI program.  Sometimes, even though it has a GUI, all you
> want to do is script it - at which point, you *have* to have
> command-line options.   
> 
>   So, command line options are wonderful for GUI programs *as well
> as* console programs.  After all, consider the ever-popular post that
> goes ...  

Actually, one problem that console (from Console-2.00b120-Beta.zip) has
is that one cannot directly give command line options to the shells that
console loads.  So if one wants the shell to be
	c:\cygwin\bin\bash.exe -i
or
	c:\windows\system32\cmd.exe /f:on /e:on
one MUST run the shell from a batch file.

- Barry

Re: Console on Sourceforge with Cygwin

[David Rothenberger]

On 8/30/2006 9:09 AM, Buchbinder, Barry (NIH/NIAID) [E] wrote:
> Actually, one problem that console (from Console-2.00b120-Beta.zip) has
> is that one cannot directly give command line options to the shells that
> console loads.  So if one wants the shell to be
> 	c:\cygwin\bin\bash.exe -i
> or
> 	c:\windows\system32\cmd.exe /f:on /e:on
> one MUST run the shell from a batch file.

It worked just fine for me with b125. I set my "bash" tab command to 
"c:\cygwin\bin\bash -li". You can even pass additional arguments to the 
tab's command with the -r switch:

    console -t bash -r "-c 'ssh somehost'"

-- 
David Rothenberger                spammer? -> spam@daveroth.dyndns.org
GPG/PGP: 0x92D68FD8, DB7C 5146 1AB0 483A 9D27 DFBA FBB9 E328 92D6 8FD8

Support Bingo, keep Grandma off the streets.

Re: Console on Sourceforge with Cygwin

[mwoehlke]

Dave Korn wrote:
> On 30 August 2006 16:19, mwoehlke wrote:
>> One Angry User wrote:
>>> On a drizzly Tuesday, the 29th day of August, 2006, Keith Christian's
>>> computer deigned to emit the following stream of bytes: 
> 
>>>> Could you provide one example for a user that would start with "Click
>>>> Start/Run and type the following command"
>>> Oh, no, it doesn't work like that.  Command-line options are for wimps who
>>> read manpages!  Console uses menus!  MENUS, man!  Now, there's real
>>> configurability!
>> Sigh.
>>
>> Command line options are wonderful... for console programs. GUI's are
>> for writing apps such that settings can be discovered /without/ having
>> to resort to the doc. I suppose you think Firefox, Thunderbird, IE, etc.
>> need manpages, and should only be configurable via command-line
>> switches? 
> 
>   It's not as orthogonal as all that.  Sometimes a GUI program isn't just a
> GUI program.  Sometimes, even though it has a GUI, all you want to do is
> script it - at which point, you *have* to have command-line options.
> [snip]

No argument :-). I was taking issue with the apparent (and sarcastic) 
disrespect of non-command-line configuration.

Maybe I should have just said:
http://isbn.nu/0671723650 ;-)

-- 
Matthew
Now where did I put my hippo?

RE: Console on Sourceforge with Cygwin

[Igor Peshansky]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006, Dave Korn wrote:

> On 30 August 2006 16:19, mwoehlke wrote:
>
> > One Angry User wrote:
> >> On a drizzly Tuesday, the 29th day of August, 2006, Keith Christian's
> >> computer deigned to emit the following stream of bytes:
>
> >>> Could you provide one example for a user that would start with "Click
> >>> Start/Run and type the following command"
> >>
> >> Oh, no, it doesn't work like that.  Command-line options are for
> >> wimps who read manpages!  Console uses menus!  MENUS, man!  Now,
> >> there's real configurability!
> >
> > Sigh.
> >
> > Command line options are wonderful... for console programs. GUI's are
> > for writing apps such that settings can be discovered /without/ having
> > to resort to the doc. I suppose you think Firefox, Thunderbird, IE,
> > etc. need manpages, and should only be configurable via command-line
> > switches?
>
>   It's not as orthogonal as all that.  Sometimes a GUI program isn't
> just a GUI program.  Sometimes, even though it has a GUI, all you want
> to do is script it - at which point, you *have* to have command-line
> options.
>
>   So, command line options are wonderful for GUI programs *as well as*
> console programs.  After all, consider the ever-popular post that goes
> ...
>
>   "Hi, can anyone tell me what command-line options I can use to get
> setup.exe to do a completely unattended installation and choose a
> selection of packages?"
>
>   Oops, I just said it.
>
>   *sip*

Except that setup.exe cannot be truly unattended with that little pop-up
in the end that says, unnecessarily, "Installation complete"...

*sip*

	Igor
-- 
				http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
      |\      _,,,---,,_	    pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu | igor@watson.ibm.com
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		Igor Peshansky, Ph.D. (name changed!)
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		old name: Igor Pechtchanski
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

"Las! je suis sot... -Mais non, tu ne l'es pas, puisque tu t'en rends compte."
"But no -- you are no fool; you call yourself a fool, there's proof enough in
that!" -- Rostand, "Cyrano de Bergerac"

Re: Console on Sourceforge with Cygwin

[Joe Smith]

"Dave Korn" <dave.korn@artimi.com> wrote in message 
news:046201c6cc48$80a00480$a501a8c0@CAM.ARTIMI.COM...
> On 30 August 2006 16:19, mwoehlke wrote:
>
>> One Angry User wrote:
>>> On a drizzly Tuesday, the 29th day of August, 2006, Keith Christian's
>>> computer deigned to emit the following stream of bytes:
>
>>>> Could you provide one example for a user that would start with "Click
>>>> Start/Run and type the following command"
>>>
>>> Oh, no, it doesn't work like that.  Command-line options are for wimps 
>>> who
>>> read manpages!  Console uses menus!  MENUS, man!  Now, there's real
>>> configurability!
>>
>> Sigh.
>>
>> Command line options are wonderful... for console programs. GUI's are
>> for writing apps such that settings can be discovered /without/ having
>> to resort to the doc. I suppose you think Firefox, Thunderbird, IE, etc.
>> need manpages, and should only be configurable via command-line
>> switches?
>
>  It's not as orthogonal as all that.  Sometimes a GUI program isn't just a
> GUI program.  Sometimes, even though it has a GUI, all you want to do is
> script it - at which point, you *have* to have command-line options.
>
No, that is not nessisary for scripting. Applescript works just fine on Mac 
programs
that have no command line arguments. On Windows, COM (aka Active-X) allows
scripting of programs without command line arguments.

I will admit that batch command line scripting (as generally offered by 
shells) is much
easier with command line options, but even then it might not be nessisary in 
some circumstances.