Feature changed by: Damian Ivanov (damianator) Feature #318203, revision 2 Title: Let's drop commandline support from Yast Requested by: Lukas Ocilka (locilka) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: Yast provides some kind of a commandline interface which is based on the same functions provided by standard Yast application (Qt, ncurses). Comandline could be used for scripting, but there are already tools that do it better: AutoYast, Chef, Puppet, SUSE Manager, sed (just to name some). Yast commadline has several drawbacks: * not used, not tested, not maintained, too much of obsolete code - too much maintenance for nothing * architecturally wrong - commandline interface to an app that uses commandline tools (e.g., commandline for Services Manager? This is obviously systemctl) * implemented as kind of a hack What do we lose if we remove it? * Possbility for scripting, but as Yast only builds on other cmdline tools or files, there are replacements Another possibility would be to replace commandline with a static information advicing user which tools to use to configure a particular service manually. Business case (Partner benefit): openSUSE.org: Less unused code to maintain == more time to do something that really matters + Discussion: + #1: Damian Ivanov (damianator) (2014-11-27 13:44:17) + -1 if we are to to do that, retire YaST altogether instead. I always + liked the cmd version of YaST since often the GUI version crashed if + the wrong qt/gtk lib is installed or you fucked up X server. I think + though more and more parts of YaST should be retired and replaced by + other tools but not specifically the ncurses version. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/318203

Feature changed by: Lukas Ocilka (locilka) Feature #318203, revision 5 Title: Let's drop commandline support from Yast + Info Provider: Damian Ivanov (damianator) Requested by: Lukas Ocilka (locilka) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: Yast provides some kind of a commandline interface which is based on the same functions provided by standard Yast application (Qt, ncurses). Comandline could be used for scripting, but there are already tools that do it better: AutoYast, Chef, Puppet, SUSE Manager, sed (just to name some). Yast commadline has several drawbacks: * not used, not tested, not maintained, too much of obsolete code - too much maintenance for nothing * architecturally wrong - commandline interface to an app that uses commandline tools (e.g., commandline for Services Manager? This is obviously systemctl) * implemented as kind of a hack What do we lose if we remove it? * Possbility for scripting, but as Yast only builds on other cmdline tools or files, there are replacements Another possibility would be to replace commandline with a static information advicing user which tools to use to configure a particular service manually. Business case (Partner benefit): openSUSE.org: Less unused code to maintain == more time to do something that really matters Discussion: #1: Damian Ivanov (damianator) (2014-11-27 13:44:17) -1 if we are to to do that, retire YaST altogether instead. I always liked the cmd version of YaST since often the GUI version crashed if the wrong qt/gtk lib is installed or you fucked up X server. I think though more and more parts of YaST should be retired and replaced by other tools but not specifically the ncurses version. #2: Lukas Ocilka (locilka) (2014-11-27 13:54:53) (reply to #1) Then please summarize what you use Yast commandline for. I personally don't see any reason for keeping it. BTW, we do not want to drop zypper - cmdline tool for software management. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/318203

Feature changed by: Mustafa Muhammad (mustafa_muhammad) Feature #318203, revision 7 Title: Let's drop commandline support from Yast Info Provider: Damian Ivanov (damianator) Requested by: Lukas Ocilka (locilka) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: Yast provides some kind of a commandline interface which is based on the same functions provided by standard Yast application (Qt, ncurses). Comandline could be used for scripting, but there are already tools that do it better: AutoYast, Chef, Puppet, SUSE Manager, sed (just to name some). Yast commadline has several drawbacks: * not used, not tested, not maintained, too much of obsolete code - too much maintenance for nothing * architecturally wrong - commandline interface to an app that uses commandline tools (e.g., commandline for Services Manager? This is obviously systemctl) * implemented as kind of a hack What do we lose if we remove it? * Possbility for scripting, but as Yast only builds on other cmdline tools or files, there are replacements Another possibility would be to replace commandline with a static information advicing user which tools to use to configure a particular service manually. Business case (Partner benefit): openSUSE.org: Less unused code to maintain == more time to do something that really matters Discussion: #1: Damian Ivanov (damianator) (2014-11-27 13:44:17) -1 if we are to to do that, retire YaST altogether instead. I always liked the cmd version of YaST since often the GUI version crashed if the wrong qt/gtk lib is installed or you fucked up X server. I think though more and more parts of YaST should be retired and replaced by other tools but not specifically the ncurses version. #2: Lukas Ocilka (locilka) (2014-11-27 13:54:53) (reply to #1) Then please summarize what you use Yast commandline for. I personally don't see any reason for keeping it. BTW, we do not want to drop zypper - cmdline tool for software management. #3: Stakanov Schufter (stakanov) (2014-11-28 18:56:59) I have to say I did use it quite successful in the past to repair to errors with nvidia video drivers that did not allow to start any GUI any more. (Speaking of yast from the CLI). As it turned out that for somebody that you have to assist on distance after a crash on the phone, it is far more easy to make yourself understand to that person because of the similarity of what they see with the command line version than to have to tell them correct syntax with zypper, especially when they have to tell you an search what they do have installed. That is not a very "professional" situation, but, for what I see, a far more common case in real life than one may think. I do not say however it is often that I used it. But when I had to use it, it was, IMO, helpful. The more advanced a user will be, the less s(he) will need it, of course. YMMV. + #4: Mustafa Muhammad (mustafa_muhammad) (2014-11-29 08:18:35) (reply to + #3) + Maybe you talking about the ncurses interface, running from the commandline + but acts as GUI: + http://www-uxsup.csx.cam.ac.uk/pub/doc/suse/suse9.0/userguide-9.0/ch03s10.ht... + I think this is not about it, it is about the commandline without + ncurses. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/318203

Feature changed by: Martin Pluskal (pluskalm) Feature #318203, revision 9 Title: Let's drop commandline support from Yast Info Provider: Damian Ivanov (damianator) Requested by: Lukas Ocilka (locilka) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: Yast provides some kind of a commandline interface which is based on the same functions provided by standard Yast application (Qt, ncurses). Comandline could be used for scripting, but there are already tools that do it better: AutoYast, Chef, Puppet, SUSE Manager, sed (just to name some). Yast commadline has several drawbacks: * not used, not tested, not maintained, too much of obsolete code - too much maintenance for nothing * architecturally wrong - commandline interface to an app that uses commandline tools (e.g., commandline for Services Manager? This is obviously systemctl) * implemented as kind of a hack What do we lose if we remove it? * Possbility for scripting, but as Yast only builds on other cmdline tools or files, there are replacements Another possibility would be to replace commandline with a static information advicing user which tools to use to configure a particular service manually. Business case (Partner benefit): openSUSE.org: Less unused code to maintain == more time to do something that really matters Discussion: #1: Damian Ivanov (damianator) (2014-11-27 13:44:17) -1 if we are to to do that, retire YaST altogether instead. I always liked the cmd version of YaST since often the GUI version crashed if the wrong qt/gtk lib is installed or you fucked up X server. I think though more and more parts of YaST should be retired and replaced by other tools but not specifically the ncurses version. #2: Lukas Ocilka (locilka) (2014-11-27 13:54:53) (reply to #1) Then please summarize what you use Yast commandline for. I personally don't see any reason for keeping it. BTW, we do not want to drop zypper - cmdline tool for software management. #3: Stakanov Schufter (stakanov) (2014-11-28 18:56:59) I have to say I did use it quite successful in the past to repair to errors with nvidia video drivers that did not allow to start any GUI any more. (Speaking of yast from the CLI). As it turned out that for somebody that you have to assist on distance after a crash on the phone, it is far more easy to make yourself understand to that person because of the similarity of what they see with the command line version than to have to tell them correct syntax with zypper, especially when they have to tell you an search what they do have installed. That is not a very "professional" situation, but, for what I see, a far more common case in real life than one may think. I do not say however it is often that I used it. But when I had to use it, it was, IMO, helpful. The more advanced a user will be, the less s(he) will need it, of course. YMMV. #4: Mustafa Muhammad (mustafa_muhammad) (2014-11-29 08:18:35) (reply to #3) Maybe you talking about the ncurses interface, running from the commandline but acts as GUI: http://www-uxsup.csx.cam.ac.uk/pub/doc/suse/suse9.0/userguide-9.0/ch03s10.ht... I think this is not about it, it is about the commandline without ncurses. #5: Stakanov Schufter (stakanov) (2014-11-29 10:30:21) (reply to #4) Yes, this is correct. So the ncurses interface would work the same if I understand you well. CLI would then mean the isolated modules on the CLI (#yast -l)? If not how would I call yast from the CLI other then with yast -h If this is going to be a pure desktop edition than that would make sense. However I should rather avoid to look from a perspective of a "stand alone user", shouldn't I? IMO, one of the strengths of a distribution (free as free beer) like opensuse is that it brings everything for both CLI administration and GUI. My question would now be: the OP then claims that nobody uses yast CLI and that it has no competitive advantage compared to the set-up of comparable distributions in a comparable use-case? If it has no competitive advantage you would take it off. If it has but nobody uses it: one would have to think about why is this (often lack of visibility / documentation, isn't it). To be honest, the reason why I am writing this is that I recall the "good idea" to take off SAX at the time, which was then described as a "belly feeling decision" but as the argument went, it was not supported any more and nobody wanted to maintain the code. Given the fun than one had for at least two releases (at least), to get the video set-up run correctly, I would rather advice to be damn sure that nobody uses it and needs it and that it has perfect substitutes. Another question I would have, for the OP but not only, in this regard: given that opensuse did call for people to write new modules for the CLI, would this mean that these are going to be isolated from the CLI function anyway (as this would anyway obsolete the CLI function very swiftly in case the call for modules will be a success)? It would also mean that you are sure nobody is coming up with a module that would be useful also (or especially) to access through the CLI. + #6: Martin Pluskal (pluskalm) (2014-11-29 13:24:26) (reply to #5) + Ncurses (text based interface) and CLI are different things, example of + yast CLI usage would be "yast2 ntp-client enable" - and I dare to + assume that it is actually first time you hear about such + functionality. Possibility of abandoning CLI interface does not mean + that you would not be able to call yast or yast modules from command + line. > given that opensuse did call for people to write new modules + for the CLI "new modules for CLI"- I am not sure I understand what you + mean by this. + To avoid further confusion: + https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Command-line_interface vs. + https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Text-based_user_interface -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/318203

Feature changed by: Graham Davis (Cloddy) Feature #318203, revision 11 Title: Let's drop commandline support from Yast Info Provider: Damian Ivanov (damianator) Requested by: Lukas Ocilka (locilka) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: Yast provides some kind of a commandline interface which is based on the same functions provided by standard Yast application (Qt, ncurses). Comandline could be used for scripting, but there are already tools that do it better: AutoYast, Chef, Puppet, SUSE Manager, sed (just to name some). Yast commadline has several drawbacks: * not used, not tested, not maintained, too much of obsolete code - too much maintenance for nothing * architecturally wrong - commandline interface to an app that uses commandline tools (e.g., commandline for Services Manager? This is obviously systemctl) * implemented as kind of a hack What do we lose if we remove it? * Possbility for scripting, but as Yast only builds on other cmdline tools or files, there are replacements Another possibility would be to replace commandline with a static information advicing user which tools to use to configure a particular service manually. Business case (Partner benefit): openSUSE.org: Less unused code to maintain == more time to do something that really matters Discussion: #1: Damian Ivanov (damianator) (2014-11-27 13:44:17) -1 if we are to to do that, retire YaST altogether instead. I always liked the cmd version of YaST since often the GUI version crashed if the wrong qt/gtk lib is installed or you fucked up X server. I think though more and more parts of YaST should be retired and replaced by other tools but not specifically the ncurses version. #2: Lukas Ocilka (locilka) (2014-11-27 13:54:53) (reply to #1) Then please summarize what you use Yast commandline for. I personally don't see any reason for keeping it. BTW, we do not want to drop zypper - cmdline tool for software management. #3: Stakanov Schufter (stakanov) (2014-11-28 18:56:59) I have to say I did use it quite successful in the past to repair to errors with nvidia video drivers that did not allow to start any GUI any more. (Speaking of yast from the CLI). As it turned out that for somebody that you have to assist on distance after a crash on the phone, it is far more easy to make yourself understand to that person because of the similarity of what they see with the command line version than to have to tell them correct syntax with zypper, especially when they have to tell you an search what they do have installed. That is not a very "professional" situation, but, for what I see, a far more common case in real life than one may think. I do not say however it is often that I used it. But when I had to use it, it was, IMO, helpful. The more advanced a user will be, the less s(he) will need it, of course. YMMV. #4: Mustafa Muhammad (mustafa_muhammad) (2014-11-29 08:18:35) (reply to #3) Maybe you talking about the ncurses interface, running from the commandline but acts as GUI: http://www-uxsup.csx.cam.ac.uk/pub/doc/suse/suse9.0/userguide-9.0/ch03s10.ht... I think this is not about it, it is about the commandline without ncurses. #5: Stakanov Schufter (stakanov) (2014-11-29 10:30:21) (reply to #4) Yes, this is correct. So the ncurses interface would work the same if I understand you well. CLI would then mean the isolated modules on the CLI (#yast -l)? If not how would I call yast from the CLI other then with yast -h If this is going to be a pure desktop edition than that would make sense. However I should rather avoid to look from a perspective of a "stand alone user", shouldn't I? IMO, one of the strengths of a distribution (free as free beer) like opensuse is that it brings everything for both CLI administration and GUI. My question would now be: the OP then claims that nobody uses yast CLI and that it has no competitive advantage compared to the set-up of comparable distributions in a comparable use-case? If it has no competitive advantage you would take it off. If it has but nobody uses it: one would have to think about why is this (often lack of visibility / documentation, isn't it). To be honest, the reason why I am writing this is that I recall the "good idea" to take off SAX at the time, which was then described as a "belly feeling decision" but as the argument went, it was not supported any more and nobody wanted to maintain the code. Given the fun than one had for at least two releases (at least), to get the video set-up run correctly, I would rather advice to be damn sure that nobody uses it and needs it and that it has perfect substitutes. Another question I would have, for the OP but not only, in this regard: given that opensuse did call for people to write new modules for the CLI, would this mean that these are going to be isolated from the CLI function anyway (as this would anyway obsolete the CLI function very swiftly in case the call for modules will be a success)? It would also mean that you are sure nobody is coming up with a module that would be useful also (or especially) to access through the CLI. #6: Martin Pluskal (pluskalm) (2014-11-29 13:24:26) (reply to #5) Ncurses (text based interface) and CLI are different things, example of yast CLI usage would be "yast2 ntp-client enable" - and I dare to assume that it is actually first time you hear about such functionality. Possibility of abandoning CLI interface does not mean that you would not be able to call yast or yast modules from command line. > given that opensuse did call for people to write new modules for the CLI "new modules for CLI"- I am not sure I understand what you mean by this. To avoid further confusion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Command-line_interface vs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Text-based_user_interface #7: Damian Ivanov (damianator) (2014-11-29 13:48:28) Just to clarify you want to drop Ncurses interface right? I have not even heard of a cli interface. If there is a cli interface - ok drop it. + #8: Graham Davis (cloddy) (2014-11-29 14:26:52) (reply to #7) + Up until this year, I'd not heard of the Ncurses interface either but + then, due to the YaST gui collapse, I found it vital. So, because of + that, I'm a wee bit wary about dropping something because I haven't + heard of it. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/318203

Feature changed by: Martin Pluskal (pluskalm) Feature #318203, revision 13 Title: Let's drop commandline support from Yast Info Provider: Damian Ivanov (damianator) Requested by: Lukas Ocilka (locilka) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: Yast provides some kind of a commandline interface which is based on the same functions provided by standard Yast application (Qt, ncurses). Comandline could be used for scripting, but there are already tools that do it better: AutoYast, Chef, Puppet, SUSE Manager, sed (just to name some). Yast commadline has several drawbacks: * not used, not tested, not maintained, too much of obsolete code - too much maintenance for nothing * architecturally wrong - commandline interface to an app that uses commandline tools (e.g., commandline for Services Manager? This is obviously systemctl) * implemented as kind of a hack What do we lose if we remove it? * Possbility for scripting, but as Yast only builds on other cmdline tools or files, there are replacements Another possibility would be to replace commandline with a static information advicing user which tools to use to configure a particular service manually. Business case (Partner benefit): openSUSE.org: Less unused code to maintain == more time to do something that really matters Discussion: #1: Damian Ivanov (damianator) (2014-11-27 13:44:17) -1 if we are to to do that, retire YaST altogether instead. I always liked the cmd version of YaST since often the GUI version crashed if the wrong qt/gtk lib is installed or you fucked up X server. I think though more and more parts of YaST should be retired and replaced by other tools but not specifically the ncurses version. #2: Lukas Ocilka (locilka) (2014-11-27 13:54:53) (reply to #1) Then please summarize what you use Yast commandline for. I personally don't see any reason for keeping it. BTW, we do not want to drop zypper - cmdline tool for software management. #3: Stakanov Schufter (stakanov) (2014-11-28 18:56:59) I have to say I did use it quite successful in the past to repair to errors with nvidia video drivers that did not allow to start any GUI any more. (Speaking of yast from the CLI). As it turned out that for somebody that you have to assist on distance after a crash on the phone, it is far more easy to make yourself understand to that person because of the similarity of what they see with the command line version than to have to tell them correct syntax with zypper, especially when they have to tell you an search what they do have installed. That is not a very "professional" situation, but, for what I see, a far more common case in real life than one may think. I do not say however it is often that I used it. But when I had to use it, it was, IMO, helpful. The more advanced a user will be, the less s(he) will need it, of course. YMMV. #4: Mustafa Muhammad (mustafa_muhammad) (2014-11-29 08:18:35) (reply to #3) Maybe you talking about the ncurses interface, running from the commandline but acts as GUI: http://www-uxsup.csx.cam.ac.uk/pub/doc/suse/suse9.0/userguide-9.0/ch03s10.ht... I think this is not about it, it is about the commandline without ncurses. #5: Stakanov Schufter (stakanov) (2014-11-29 10:30:21) (reply to #4) Yes, this is correct. So the ncurses interface would work the same if I understand you well. CLI would then mean the isolated modules on the CLI (#yast -l)? If not how would I call yast from the CLI other then with yast -h If this is going to be a pure desktop edition than that would make sense. However I should rather avoid to look from a perspective of a "stand alone user", shouldn't I? IMO, one of the strengths of a distribution (free as free beer) like opensuse is that it brings everything for both CLI administration and GUI. My question would now be: the OP then claims that nobody uses yast CLI and that it has no competitive advantage compared to the set-up of comparable distributions in a comparable use-case? If it has no competitive advantage you would take it off. If it has but nobody uses it: one would have to think about why is this (often lack of visibility / documentation, isn't it). To be honest, the reason why I am writing this is that I recall the "good idea" to take off SAX at the time, which was then described as a "belly feeling decision" but as the argument went, it was not supported any more and nobody wanted to maintain the code. Given the fun than one had for at least two releases (at least), to get the video set-up run correctly, I would rather advice to be damn sure that nobody uses it and needs it and that it has perfect substitutes. Another question I would have, for the OP but not only, in this regard: given that opensuse did call for people to write new modules for the CLI, would this mean that these are going to be isolated from the CLI function anyway (as this would anyway obsolete the CLI function very swiftly in case the call for modules will be a success)? It would also mean that you are sure nobody is coming up with a module that would be useful also (or especially) to access through the CLI. #6: Martin Pluskal (pluskalm) (2014-11-29 13:24:26) (reply to #5) Ncurses (text based interface) and CLI are different things, example of yast CLI usage would be "yast2 ntp-client enable" - and I dare to assume that it is actually first time you hear about such functionality. Possibility of abandoning CLI interface does not mean that you would not be able to call yast or yast modules from command line. > given that opensuse did call for people to write new modules for the CLI "new modules for CLI"- I am not sure I understand what you mean by this. To avoid further confusion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Command-line_interface vs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Text-based_user_interface #9: Stakanov Schufter (stakanov) (2014-11-29 15:52:33) (reply to #6) Well, no confusion, just a stupid typo, reads GUI (and not the textbased ncurses one). So: "Another question I would have, for the OP but not only, in this regard: given that opensuse did call for people to write new modules for the GUI (we are speaking of Yast), would this mean that these are going to be isolated from the CLI function anyway (as this would anyway obsolete the CLI functions very swiftly in case the call for modules will be a success as they would not be updated as well)? It would also mean that you are sure nobody is coming up with a module for the qt-based, recently rewritten in ruby Yast, that would be useful also (or especially) to access through the CLI function (and here I am speaking about the CLI and not textbase). You are right. Every 50% or more I try to find manuals or explanations on opensuse, I do find a) the original page with a reference to opensuse 11.4 or so and an advice that this page is outdated, to click "here" when you do that you find: this page is currently under construction or has not been written, with a kind advice that I could do that...but I needed the info in the first place. I tried to google, the only available indication for Yast CLI options are for opensuse 10.2 (Max Plank Institute) and 11.4 from some Linux info site. No newer documentation is available, not even at novell it seems. Novell documentation refers to 10.3 opensuse. Besides, it seems that yast CLI is not loved and quite "secret" as I do not find any documentation easily. Would you expect people to use things that are not known? Fingerprint reader module in yast was taken out for example because it was claimed (do not know on what bases) that nobody used it. I think it was taken out because nobody did find it in the first place. So on this point I agree with Graham Davis: only because people do not know about it, that does not mean that it is not useful. Ncurses interface (textbase) is IMO useful, I "have heard about it" it and I use it nearly every time when there is a video driver problem, to be able to roll back. + #10: Martin Pluskal (pluskalm) (2014-11-29 16:58:10) (reply to #9) + What you mean by "isolated from the CLI function anyway" - I must admit + that I don't follow you here. + "is coming up with a module for the qt-based," - yast modules are afaik + not qt, gtk or ncurses specific, I fail to see how removal of cmdline + yast interface would affect new yast modules. #7: Damian Ivanov (damianator) (2014-11-29 13:48:28) Just to clarify you want to drop Ncurses interface right? I have not even heard of a cli interface. If there is a cli interface - ok drop it. #8: Graham Davis (cloddy) (2014-11-29 14:26:52) (reply to #7) Up until this year, I'd not heard of the Ncurses interface either but then, due to the YaST gui collapse, I found it vital. So, because of that, I'm a wee bit wary about dropping something because I haven't heard of it. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/318203

Feature changed by: Neil Rickert (nrickert) Feature #318203, revision 15 Title: Let's drop commandline support from Yast Info Provider: Damian Ivanov (damianator) Requested by: Lukas Ocilka (locilka) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: Yast provides some kind of a commandline interface which is based on the same functions provided by standard Yast application (Qt, ncurses). Comandline could be used for scripting, but there are already tools that do it better: AutoYast, Chef, Puppet, SUSE Manager, sed (just to name some). Yast commadline has several drawbacks: * not used, not tested, not maintained, too much of obsolete code - too much maintenance for nothing * architecturally wrong - commandline interface to an app that uses commandline tools (e.g., commandline for Services Manager? This is obviously systemctl) * implemented as kind of a hack What do we lose if we remove it? * Possbility for scripting, but as Yast only builds on other cmdline tools or files, there are replacements Another possibility would be to replace commandline with a static information advicing user which tools to use to configure a particular service manually. Business case (Partner benefit): openSUSE.org: Less unused code to maintain == more time to do something that really matters Discussion: #1: Damian Ivanov (damianator) (2014-11-27 13:44:17) -1 if we are to to do that, retire YaST altogether instead. I always liked the cmd version of YaST since often the GUI version crashed if the wrong qt/gtk lib is installed or you fucked up X server. I think though more and more parts of YaST should be retired and replaced by other tools but not specifically the ncurses version. #2: Lukas Ocilka (locilka) (2014-11-27 13:54:53) (reply to #1) Then please summarize what you use Yast commandline for. I personally don't see any reason for keeping it. BTW, we do not want to drop zypper - cmdline tool for software management. #3: Stakanov Schufter (stakanov) (2014-11-28 18:56:59) I have to say I did use it quite successful in the past to repair to errors with nvidia video drivers that did not allow to start any GUI any more. (Speaking of yast from the CLI). As it turned out that for somebody that you have to assist on distance after a crash on the phone, it is far more easy to make yourself understand to that person because of the similarity of what they see with the command line version than to have to tell them correct syntax with zypper, especially when they have to tell you an search what they do have installed. That is not a very "professional" situation, but, for what I see, a far more common case in real life than one may think. I do not say however it is often that I used it. But when I had to use it, it was, IMO, helpful. The more advanced a user will be, the less s(he) will need it, of course. YMMV. #4: Mustafa Muhammad (mustafa_muhammad) (2014-11-29 08:18:35) (reply to #3) Maybe you talking about the ncurses interface, running from the commandline but acts as GUI: http://www-uxsup.csx.cam.ac.uk/pub/doc/suse/suse9.0/userguide-9.0/ch03s10.ht... I think this is not about it, it is about the commandline without ncurses. #5: Stakanov Schufter (stakanov) (2014-11-29 10:30:21) (reply to #4) Yes, this is correct. So the ncurses interface would work the same if I understand you well. CLI would then mean the isolated modules on the CLI (#yast -l)? If not how would I call yast from the CLI other then with yast -h If this is going to be a pure desktop edition than that would make sense. However I should rather avoid to look from a perspective of a "stand alone user", shouldn't I? IMO, one of the strengths of a distribution (free as free beer) like opensuse is that it brings everything for both CLI administration and GUI. My question would now be: the OP then claims that nobody uses yast CLI and that it has no competitive advantage compared to the set-up of comparable distributions in a comparable use-case? If it has no competitive advantage you would take it off. If it has but nobody uses it: one would have to think about why is this (often lack of visibility / documentation, isn't it). To be honest, the reason why I am writing this is that I recall the "good idea" to take off SAX at the time, which was then described as a "belly feeling decision" but as the argument went, it was not supported any more and nobody wanted to maintain the code. Given the fun than one had for at least two releases (at least), to get the video set-up run correctly, I would rather advice to be damn sure that nobody uses it and needs it and that it has perfect substitutes. Another question I would have, for the OP but not only, in this regard: given that opensuse did call for people to write new modules for the CLI, would this mean that these are going to be isolated from the CLI function anyway (as this would anyway obsolete the CLI function very swiftly in case the call for modules will be a success)? It would also mean that you are sure nobody is coming up with a module that would be useful also (or especially) to access through the CLI. #6: Martin Pluskal (pluskalm) (2014-11-29 13:24:26) (reply to #5) Ncurses (text based interface) and CLI are different things, example of yast CLI usage would be "yast2 ntp-client enable" - and I dare to assume that it is actually first time you hear about such functionality. Possibility of abandoning CLI interface does not mean that you would not be able to call yast or yast modules from command line. > given that opensuse did call for people to write new modules for the CLI "new modules for CLI"- I am not sure I understand what you mean by this. To avoid further confusion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Command-line_interface vs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Text-based_user_interface #9: Stakanov Schufter (stakanov) (2014-11-29 15:52:33) (reply to #6) Well, no confusion, just a stupid typo, reads GUI (and not the textbased ncurses one). So: "Another question I would have, for the OP but not only, in this regard: given that opensuse did call for people to write new modules for the GUI (we are speaking of Yast), would this mean that these are going to be isolated from the CLI function anyway (as this would anyway obsolete the CLI functions very swiftly in case the call for modules will be a success as they would not be updated as well)? It would also mean that you are sure nobody is coming up with a module for the qt-based, recently rewritten in ruby Yast, that would be useful also (or especially) to access through the CLI function (and here I am speaking about the CLI and not textbase). You are right. Every 50% or more I try to find manuals or explanations on opensuse, I do find a) the original page with a reference to opensuse 11.4 or so and an advice that this page is outdated, to click "here" when you do that you find: this page is currently under construction or has not been written, with a kind advice that I could do that...but I needed the info in the first place. I tried to google, the only available indication for Yast CLI options are for opensuse 10.2 (Max Plank Institute) and 11.4 from some Linux info site. No newer documentation is available, not even at novell it seems. Novell documentation refers to 10.3 opensuse. Besides, it seems that yast CLI is not loved and quite "secret" as I do not find any documentation easily. Would you expect people to use things that are not known? Fingerprint reader module in yast was taken out for example because it was claimed (do not know on what bases) that nobody used it. I think it was taken out because nobody did find it in the first place. So on this point I agree with Graham Davis: only because people do not know about it, that does not mean that it is not useful. Ncurses interface (textbase) is IMO useful, I "have heard about it" it and I use it nearly every time when there is a video driver problem, to be able to roll back. #10: Martin Pluskal (pluskalm) (2014-11-29 16:58:10) (reply to #9) What you mean by "isolated from the CLI function anyway" - I must admit that I don't follow you here. "is coming up with a module for the qt-based," - yast modules are afaik not qt, gtk or ncurses specific, I fail to see how removal of cmdline yast interface would affect new yast modules. #7: Damian Ivanov (damianator) (2014-11-29 13:48:28) Just to clarify you want to drop Ncurses interface right? I have not even heard of a cli interface. If there is a cli interface - ok drop it. #8: Graham Davis (cloddy) (2014-11-29 14:26:52) (reply to #7) Up until this year, I'd not heard of the Ncurses interface either but then, due to the YaST gui collapse, I found it vital. So, because of that, I'm a wee bit wary about dropping something because I haven't heard of it. #11: Martin Pluskal (pluskalm) (2014-11-29 17:01:43) (reply to #8) Well original question was if somebody is using cli interface or has some potential uses for it - and so far all comments provided same answer to both questions. + #12: Neil Rickert (nrickert) (2014-12-01 04:48:27) + Keep the "ncurses" interface. It is valuable to recover from problems + or with ssh access. + If there's another CLI interface other than "ncurses", then I don't use + it and I don't see much point in having it. People who prefer + exclusively CLI administration would probably prefer to do that without + yast. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/318203

Feature changed by: Lukas Ocilka (locilka) Feature #318203, revision 17 Title: Let's drop commandline support from Yast Info Provider: Damian Ivanov (damianator) Requested by: Lukas Ocilka (locilka) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: Yast provides some kind of a commandline interface which is based on the same functions provided by standard Yast application (Qt, ncurses). Comandline could be used for scripting, but there are already tools that do it better: AutoYast, Chef, Puppet, SUSE Manager, sed (just to name some). Yast commadline has several drawbacks: * not used, not tested, not maintained, too much of obsolete code - too much maintenance for nothing * architecturally wrong - commandline interface to an app that uses commandline tools (e.g., commandline for Services Manager? This is obviously systemctl) * implemented as kind of a hack What do we lose if we remove it? * Possbility for scripting, but as Yast only builds on other cmdline tools or files, there are replacements Another possibility would be to replace commandline with a static information advicing user which tools to use to configure a particular service manually. Business case (Partner benefit): openSUSE.org: Less unused code to maintain == more time to do something that really matters Discussion: #1: Damian Ivanov (damianator) (2014-11-27 13:44:17) -1 if we are to to do that, retire YaST altogether instead. I always liked the cmd version of YaST since often the GUI version crashed if the wrong qt/gtk lib is installed or you fucked up X server. I think though more and more parts of YaST should be retired and replaced by other tools but not specifically the ncurses version. #2: Lukas Ocilka (locilka) (2014-11-27 13:54:53) (reply to #1) Then please summarize what you use Yast commandline for. I personally don't see any reason for keeping it. BTW, we do not want to drop zypper - cmdline tool for software management. #3: Stakanov Schufter (stakanov) (2014-11-28 18:56:59) I have to say I did use it quite successful in the past to repair to errors with nvidia video drivers that did not allow to start any GUI any more. (Speaking of yast from the CLI). As it turned out that for somebody that you have to assist on distance after a crash on the phone, it is far more easy to make yourself understand to that person because of the similarity of what they see with the command line version than to have to tell them correct syntax with zypper, especially when they have to tell you an search what they do have installed. That is not a very "professional" situation, but, for what I see, a far more common case in real life than one may think. I do not say however it is often that I used it. But when I had to use it, it was, IMO, helpful. The more advanced a user will be, the less s(he) will need it, of course. YMMV. #4: Mustafa Muhammad (mustafa_muhammad) (2014-11-29 08:18:35) (reply to #3) Maybe you talking about the ncurses interface, running from the commandline but acts as GUI: http://www-uxsup.csx.cam.ac.uk/pub/doc/suse/suse9.0/userguide-9.0/ch03s10.ht... I think this is not about it, it is about the commandline without ncurses. #5: Stakanov Schufter (stakanov) (2014-11-29 10:30:21) (reply to #4) Yes, this is correct. So the ncurses interface would work the same if I understand you well. CLI would then mean the isolated modules on the CLI (#yast -l)? If not how would I call yast from the CLI other then with yast -h If this is going to be a pure desktop edition than that would make sense. However I should rather avoid to look from a perspective of a "stand alone user", shouldn't I? IMO, one of the strengths of a distribution (free as free beer) like opensuse is that it brings everything for both CLI administration and GUI. My question would now be: the OP then claims that nobody uses yast CLI and that it has no competitive advantage compared to the set-up of comparable distributions in a comparable use-case? If it has no competitive advantage you would take it off. If it has but nobody uses it: one would have to think about why is this (often lack of visibility / documentation, isn't it). To be honest, the reason why I am writing this is that I recall the "good idea" to take off SAX at the time, which was then described as a "belly feeling decision" but as the argument went, it was not supported any more and nobody wanted to maintain the code. Given the fun than one had for at least two releases (at least), to get the video set-up run correctly, I would rather advice to be damn sure that nobody uses it and needs it and that it has perfect substitutes. Another question I would have, for the OP but not only, in this regard: given that opensuse did call for people to write new modules for the CLI, would this mean that these are going to be isolated from the CLI function anyway (as this would anyway obsolete the CLI function very swiftly in case the call for modules will be a success)? It would also mean that you are sure nobody is coming up with a module that would be useful also (or especially) to access through the CLI. #6: Martin Pluskal (pluskalm) (2014-11-29 13:24:26) (reply to #5) Ncurses (text based interface) and CLI are different things, example of yast CLI usage would be "yast2 ntp-client enable" - and I dare to assume that it is actually first time you hear about such functionality. Possibility of abandoning CLI interface does not mean that you would not be able to call yast or yast modules from command line. > given that opensuse did call for people to write new modules for the CLI "new modules for CLI"- I am not sure I understand what you mean by this. To avoid further confusion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Command-line_interface vs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Text-based_user_interface #9: Stakanov Schufter (stakanov) (2014-11-29 15:52:33) (reply to #6) Well, no confusion, just a stupid typo, reads GUI (and not the textbased ncurses one). So: "Another question I would have, for the OP but not only, in this regard: given that opensuse did call for people to write new modules for the GUI (we are speaking of Yast), would this mean that these are going to be isolated from the CLI function anyway (as this would anyway obsolete the CLI functions very swiftly in case the call for modules will be a success as they would not be updated as well)? It would also mean that you are sure nobody is coming up with a module for the qt-based, recently rewritten in ruby Yast, that would be useful also (or especially) to access through the CLI function (and here I am speaking about the CLI and not textbase). You are right. Every 50% or more I try to find manuals or explanations on opensuse, I do find a) the original page with a reference to opensuse 11.4 or so and an advice that this page is outdated, to click "here" when you do that you find: this page is currently under construction or has not been written, with a kind advice that I could do that...but I needed the info in the first place. I tried to google, the only available indication for Yast CLI options are for opensuse 10.2 (Max Plank Institute) and 11.4 from some Linux info site. No newer documentation is available, not even at novell it seems. Novell documentation refers to 10.3 opensuse. Besides, it seems that yast CLI is not loved and quite "secret" as I do not find any documentation easily. Would you expect people to use things that are not known? Fingerprint reader module in yast was taken out for example because it was claimed (do not know on what bases) that nobody used it. I think it was taken out because nobody did find it in the first place. So on this point I agree with Graham Davis: only because people do not know about it, that does not mean that it is not useful. Ncurses interface (textbase) is IMO useful, I "have heard about it" it and I use it nearly every time when there is a video driver problem, to be able to roll back. #10: Martin Pluskal (pluskalm) (2014-11-29 16:58:10) (reply to #9) What you mean by "isolated from the CLI function anyway" - I must admit that I don't follow you here. "is coming up with a module for the qt-based," - yast modules are afaik not qt, gtk or ncurses specific, I fail to see how removal of cmdline yast interface would affect new yast modules. #7: Damian Ivanov (damianator) (2014-11-29 13:48:28) Just to clarify you want to drop Ncurses interface right? I have not even heard of a cli interface. If there is a cli interface - ok drop it. #8: Graham Davis (cloddy) (2014-11-29 14:26:52) (reply to #7) Up until this year, I'd not heard of the Ncurses interface either but then, due to the YaST gui collapse, I found it vital. So, because of that, I'm a wee bit wary about dropping something because I haven't heard of it. #11: Martin Pluskal (pluskalm) (2014-11-29 17:01:43) (reply to #8) Well original question was if somebody is using cli interface or has some potential uses for it - and so far all comments provided same answer to both questions. #12: Neil Rickert (nrickert) (2014-12-01 04:48:27) Keep the "ncurses" interface. It is valuable to recover from problems or with ssh access. If there's another CLI interface other than "ncurses", then I don't use it and I don't see much point in having it. People who prefer exclusively CLI administration would probably prefer to do that without yast. #13: Martin Pluskal (pluskalm) (2014-12-02 12:45:53) Well apparently there are some people using yast -i (see http://www.reddit.com/r/openSUSE/comments/2nxj3s/error_when_installing_apach... ) + #14: Lukas Ocilka (locilka) (2014-12-02 13:23:18) (reply to #13) + Yes, looks like we need to educate users to use zypper. `zypper in + apache2` does the very same as yast -i apache2, but better. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/318203

Feature changed by: Lukas Ocilka (locilka) Feature #318203, revision 19 Title: Let's drop commandline support from Yast Info Provider: Damian Ivanov (damianator) Requested by: Lukas Ocilka (locilka) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: Yast provides some kind of a commandline interface which is based on the same functions provided by standard Yast application (Qt, ncurses). Comandline could be used for scripting, but there are already tools that do it better: AutoYast, Chef, Puppet, SUSE Manager, sed (just to name some). Yast commadline has several drawbacks: * not used, not tested, not maintained, too much of obsolete code - too much maintenance for nothing * architecturally wrong - commandline interface to an app that uses commandline tools (e.g., commandline for Services Manager? This is obviously systemctl) * implemented as kind of a hack What do we lose if we remove it? * Possbility for scripting, but as Yast only builds on other cmdline tools or files, there are replacements Another possibility would be to replace commandline with a static information advicing user which tools to use to configure a particular service manually. Business case (Partner benefit): openSUSE.org: Less unused code to maintain == more time to do something that really matters Discussion: #1: Damian Ivanov (damianator) (2014-11-27 13:44:17) -1 if we are to to do that, retire YaST altogether instead. I always liked the cmd version of YaST since often the GUI version crashed if the wrong qt/gtk lib is installed or you fucked up X server. I think though more and more parts of YaST should be retired and replaced by other tools but not specifically the ncurses version. #2: Lukas Ocilka (locilka) (2014-11-27 13:54:53) (reply to #1) Then please summarize what you use Yast commandline for. I personally don't see any reason for keeping it. BTW, we do not want to drop zypper - cmdline tool for software management. #3: Stakanov Schufter (stakanov) (2014-11-28 18:56:59) I have to say I did use it quite successful in the past to repair to errors with nvidia video drivers that did not allow to start any GUI any more. (Speaking of yast from the CLI). As it turned out that for somebody that you have to assist on distance after a crash on the phone, it is far more easy to make yourself understand to that person because of the similarity of what they see with the command line version than to have to tell them correct syntax with zypper, especially when they have to tell you an search what they do have installed. That is not a very "professional" situation, but, for what I see, a far more common case in real life than one may think. I do not say however it is often that I used it. But when I had to use it, it was, IMO, helpful. The more advanced a user will be, the less s(he) will need it, of course. YMMV. #4: Mustafa Muhammad (mustafa_muhammad) (2014-11-29 08:18:35) (reply to #3) Maybe you talking about the ncurses interface, running from the commandline but acts as GUI: http://www-uxsup.csx.cam.ac.uk/pub/doc/suse/suse9.0/userguide-9.0/ch03s10.ht... I think this is not about it, it is about the commandline without ncurses. #5: Stakanov Schufter (stakanov) (2014-11-29 10:30:21) (reply to #4) Yes, this is correct. So the ncurses interface would work the same if I understand you well. CLI would then mean the isolated modules on the CLI (#yast -l)? If not how would I call yast from the CLI other then with yast -h If this is going to be a pure desktop edition than that would make sense. However I should rather avoid to look from a perspective of a "stand alone user", shouldn't I? IMO, one of the strengths of a distribution (free as free beer) like opensuse is that it brings everything for both CLI administration and GUI. My question would now be: the OP then claims that nobody uses yast CLI and that it has no competitive advantage compared to the set-up of comparable distributions in a comparable use-case? If it has no competitive advantage you would take it off. If it has but nobody uses it: one would have to think about why is this (often lack of visibility / documentation, isn't it). To be honest, the reason why I am writing this is that I recall the "good idea" to take off SAX at the time, which was then described as a "belly feeling decision" but as the argument went, it was not supported any more and nobody wanted to maintain the code. Given the fun than one had for at least two releases (at least), to get the video set-up run correctly, I would rather advice to be damn sure that nobody uses it and needs it and that it has perfect substitutes. Another question I would have, for the OP but not only, in this regard: given that opensuse did call for people to write new modules for the CLI, would this mean that these are going to be isolated from the CLI function anyway (as this would anyway obsolete the CLI function very swiftly in case the call for modules will be a success)? It would also mean that you are sure nobody is coming up with a module that would be useful also (or especially) to access through the CLI. #6: Martin Pluskal (pluskalm) (2014-11-29 13:24:26) (reply to #5) Ncurses (text based interface) and CLI are different things, example of yast CLI usage would be "yast2 ntp-client enable" - and I dare to assume that it is actually first time you hear about such functionality. Possibility of abandoning CLI interface does not mean that you would not be able to call yast or yast modules from command line. > given that opensuse did call for people to write new modules for the CLI "new modules for CLI"- I am not sure I understand what you mean by this. To avoid further confusion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Command-line_interface vs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Text-based_user_interface #9: Stakanov Schufter (stakanov) (2014-11-29 15:52:33) (reply to #6) Well, no confusion, just a stupid typo, reads GUI (and not the textbased ncurses one). So: "Another question I would have, for the OP but not only, in this regard: given that opensuse did call for people to write new modules for the GUI (we are speaking of Yast), would this mean that these are going to be isolated from the CLI function anyway (as this would anyway obsolete the CLI functions very swiftly in case the call for modules will be a success as they would not be updated as well)? It would also mean that you are sure nobody is coming up with a module for the qt-based, recently rewritten in ruby Yast, that would be useful also (or especially) to access through the CLI function (and here I am speaking about the CLI and not textbase). You are right. Every 50% or more I try to find manuals or explanations on opensuse, I do find a) the original page with a reference to opensuse 11.4 or so and an advice that this page is outdated, to click "here" when you do that you find: this page is currently under construction or has not been written, with a kind advice that I could do that...but I needed the info in the first place. I tried to google, the only available indication for Yast CLI options are for opensuse 10.2 (Max Plank Institute) and 11.4 from some Linux info site. No newer documentation is available, not even at novell it seems. Novell documentation refers to 10.3 opensuse. Besides, it seems that yast CLI is not loved and quite "secret" as I do not find any documentation easily. Would you expect people to use things that are not known? Fingerprint reader module in yast was taken out for example because it was claimed (do not know on what bases) that nobody used it. I think it was taken out because nobody did find it in the first place. So on this point I agree with Graham Davis: only because people do not know about it, that does not mean that it is not useful. Ncurses interface (textbase) is IMO useful, I "have heard about it" it and I use it nearly every time when there is a video driver problem, to be able to roll back. #10: Martin Pluskal (pluskalm) (2014-11-29 16:58:10) (reply to #9) What you mean by "isolated from the CLI function anyway" - I must admit that I don't follow you here. "is coming up with a module for the qt-based," - yast modules are afaik not qt, gtk or ncurses specific, I fail to see how removal of cmdline yast interface would affect new yast modules. #15: Lukas Ocilka (locilka) (2014-12-02 13:30:59) (reply to #9) Maybe I should tell a bit about the Yast architecture ... but linke might be better: http://yastgithubio.readthedocs.org/en/latest/architecture/ Yast as you probably use it shares the very same code within ncurses, Qt (and GTK) interface. It even has the very same definition of dailogs, only the library that actually shows UI (widgets) differs. Commandline interface is a pure what-you-write-is-what-you-get such as `ls`, `grep`, etc. This shares the code with UI interface only partly and sometimes not at all. #7: Damian Ivanov (damianator) (2014-11-29 13:48:28) Just to clarify you want to drop Ncurses interface right? I have not even heard of a cli interface. If there is a cli interface - ok drop it. #8: Graham Davis (cloddy) (2014-11-29 14:26:52) (reply to #7) Up until this year, I'd not heard of the Ncurses interface either but then, due to the YaST gui collapse, I found it vital. So, because of that, I'm a wee bit wary about dropping something because I haven't heard of it. #11: Martin Pluskal (pluskalm) (2014-11-29 17:01:43) (reply to #8) Well original question was if somebody is using cli interface or has some potential uses for it - and so far all comments provided same answer to both questions. + #16: Lukas Ocilka (locilka) (2014-12-02 13:32:06) (reply to #7) + No, we definitely want to keep ncurses and Qt. #12: Neil Rickert (nrickert) (2014-12-01 04:48:27) Keep the "ncurses" interface. It is valuable to recover from problems or with ssh access. If there's another CLI interface other than "ncurses", then I don't use it and I don't see much point in having it. People who prefer exclusively CLI administration would probably prefer to do that without yast. #13: Martin Pluskal (pluskalm) (2014-12-02 12:45:53) Well apparently there are some people using yast -i (see http://www.reddit.com/r/openSUSE/comments/2nxj3s/error_when_installing_apach... ) #14: Lukas Ocilka (locilka) (2014-12-02 13:23:18) (reply to #13) Yes, looks like we need to educate users to use zypper. `zypper in apache2` does the very same as yast -i apache2, but better. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/318203

Feature changed by: Robert Klein (kleinrob) Feature #318203, revision 21 Title: Let's drop commandline support from Yast Info Provider: Damian Ivanov (damianator) Requested by: Lukas Ocilka (locilka) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: Yast provides some kind of a commandline interface which is based on the same functions provided by standard Yast application (Qt, ncurses). Comandline could be used for scripting, but there are already tools that do it better: AutoYast, Chef, Puppet, SUSE Manager, sed (just to name some). Yast commadline has several drawbacks: * not used, not tested, not maintained, too much of obsolete code - too much maintenance for nothing * architecturally wrong - commandline interface to an app that uses commandline tools (e.g., commandline for Services Manager? This is obviously systemctl) * implemented as kind of a hack What do we lose if we remove it? * Possbility for scripting, but as Yast only builds on other cmdline tools or files, there are replacements Another possibility would be to replace commandline with a static information advicing user which tools to use to configure a particular service manually. Just a side note: this is neither about text-based Yast nor graphical Yast. This is about command-line interface - you have to write commands manually in some kind of a terminal. Business case (Partner benefit): openSUSE.org: Less unused code to maintain == more time to do something that really matters Discussion: #1: Damian Ivanov (damianator) (2014-11-27 13:44:17) -1 if we are to to do that, retire YaST altogether instead. I always liked the cmd version of YaST since often the GUI version crashed if the wrong qt/gtk lib is installed or you fucked up X server. I think though more and more parts of YaST should be retired and replaced by other tools but not specifically the ncurses version. #2: Lukas Ocilka (locilka) (2014-11-27 13:54:53) (reply to #1) Then please summarize what you use Yast commandline for. I personally don't see any reason for keeping it. BTW, we do not want to drop zypper - cmdline tool for software management. #3: Stakanov Schufter (stakanov) (2014-11-28 18:56:59) I have to say I did use it quite successful in the past to repair to errors with nvidia video drivers that did not allow to start any GUI any more. (Speaking of yast from the CLI). As it turned out that for somebody that you have to assist on distance after a crash on the phone, it is far more easy to make yourself understand to that person because of the similarity of what they see with the command line version than to have to tell them correct syntax with zypper, especially when they have to tell you an search what they do have installed. That is not a very "professional" situation, but, for what I see, a far more common case in real life than one may think. I do not say however it is often that I used it. But when I had to use it, it was, IMO, helpful. The more advanced a user will be, the less s(he) will need it, of course. YMMV. #4: Mustafa Muhammad (mustafa_muhammad) (2014-11-29 08:18:35) (reply to #3) Maybe you talking about the ncurses interface, running from the commandline but acts as GUI: http://www-uxsup.csx.cam.ac.uk/pub/doc/suse/suse9.0/userguide-9.0/ch03s10.ht... I think this is not about it, it is about the commandline without ncurses. #5: Stakanov Schufter (stakanov) (2014-11-29 10:30:21) (reply to #4) Yes, this is correct. So the ncurses interface would work the same if I understand you well. CLI would then mean the isolated modules on the CLI (#yast -l)? If not how would I call yast from the CLI other then with yast -h If this is going to be a pure desktop edition than that would make sense. However I should rather avoid to look from a perspective of a "stand alone user", shouldn't I? IMO, one of the strengths of a distribution (free as free beer) like opensuse is that it brings everything for both CLI administration and GUI. My question would now be: the OP then claims that nobody uses yast CLI and that it has no competitive advantage compared to the set-up of comparable distributions in a comparable use-case? If it has no competitive advantage you would take it off. If it has but nobody uses it: one would have to think about why is this (often lack of visibility / documentation, isn't it). To be honest, the reason why I am writing this is that I recall the "good idea" to take off SAX at the time, which was then described as a "belly feeling decision" but as the argument went, it was not supported any more and nobody wanted to maintain the code. Given the fun than one had for at least two releases (at least), to get the video set-up run correctly, I would rather advice to be damn sure that nobody uses it and needs it and that it has perfect substitutes. Another question I would have, for the OP but not only, in this regard: given that opensuse did call for people to write new modules for the CLI, would this mean that these are going to be isolated from the CLI function anyway (as this would anyway obsolete the CLI function very swiftly in case the call for modules will be a success)? It would also mean that you are sure nobody is coming up with a module that would be useful also (or especially) to access through the CLI. #6: Martin Pluskal (pluskalm) (2014-11-29 13:24:26) (reply to #5) Ncurses (text based interface) and CLI are different things, example of yast CLI usage would be "yast2 ntp-client enable" - and I dare to assume that it is actually first time you hear about such functionality. Possibility of abandoning CLI interface does not mean that you would not be able to call yast or yast modules from command line. > given that opensuse did call for people to write new modules for the CLI "new modules for CLI"- I am not sure I understand what you mean by this. To avoid further confusion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Command-line_interface vs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Text-based_user_interface #9: Stakanov Schufter (stakanov) (2014-11-29 15:52:33) (reply to #6) Well, no confusion, just a stupid typo, reads GUI (and not the textbased ncurses one). So: "Another question I would have, for the OP but not only, in this regard: given that opensuse did call for people to write new modules for the GUI (we are speaking of Yast), would this mean that these are going to be isolated from the CLI function anyway (as this would anyway obsolete the CLI functions very swiftly in case the call for modules will be a success as they would not be updated as well)? It would also mean that you are sure nobody is coming up with a module for the qt-based, recently rewritten in ruby Yast, that would be useful also (or especially) to access through the CLI function (and here I am speaking about the CLI and not textbase). You are right. Every 50% or more I try to find manuals or explanations on opensuse, I do find a) the original page with a reference to opensuse 11.4 or so and an advice that this page is outdated, to click "here" when you do that you find: this page is currently under construction or has not been written, with a kind advice that I could do that...but I needed the info in the first place. I tried to google, the only available indication for Yast CLI options are for opensuse 10.2 (Max Plank Institute) and 11.4 from some Linux info site. No newer documentation is available, not even at novell it seems. Novell documentation refers to 10.3 opensuse. Besides, it seems that yast CLI is not loved and quite "secret" as I do not find any documentation easily. Would you expect people to use things that are not known? Fingerprint reader module in yast was taken out for example because it was claimed (do not know on what bases) that nobody used it. I think it was taken out because nobody did find it in the first place. So on this point I agree with Graham Davis: only because people do not know about it, that does not mean that it is not useful. Ncurses interface (textbase) is IMO useful, I "have heard about it" it and I use it nearly every time when there is a video driver problem, to be able to roll back. #10: Martin Pluskal (pluskalm) (2014-11-29 16:58:10) (reply to #9) What you mean by "isolated from the CLI function anyway" - I must admit that I don't follow you here. "is coming up with a module for the qt-based," - yast modules are afaik not qt, gtk or ncurses specific, I fail to see how removal of cmdline yast interface would affect new yast modules. #15: Lukas Ocilka (locilka) (2014-12-02 13:30:59) (reply to #9) Maybe I should tell a bit about the Yast architecture ... but linke might be better: http://yastgithubio.readthedocs.org/en/latest/architecture/ Yast as you probably use it shares the very same code within ncurses, Qt (and GTK) interface. It even has the very same definition of dailogs, only the library that actually shows UI (widgets) differs. Commandline interface is a pure what-you-write-is-what-you-get such as `ls`, `grep`, etc. This shares the code with UI interface only partly and sometimes not at all. #7: Damian Ivanov (damianator) (2014-11-29 13:48:28) Just to clarify you want to drop Ncurses interface right? I have not even heard of a cli interface. If there is a cli interface - ok drop it. #8: Graham Davis (cloddy) (2014-11-29 14:26:52) (reply to #7) Up until this year, I'd not heard of the Ncurses interface either but then, due to the YaST gui collapse, I found it vital. So, because of that, I'm a wee bit wary about dropping something because I haven't heard of it. #11: Martin Pluskal (pluskalm) (2014-11-29 17:01:43) (reply to #8) Well original question was if somebody is using cli interface or has some potential uses for it - and so far all comments provided same answer to both questions. #16: Lukas Ocilka (locilka) (2014-12-02 13:32:06) (reply to #7) No, we definitely want to keep ncurses and Qt. #12: Neil Rickert (nrickert) (2014-12-01 04:48:27) Keep the "ncurses" interface. It is valuable to recover from problems or with ssh access. If there's another CLI interface other than "ncurses", then I don't use it and I don't see much point in having it. People who prefer exclusively CLI administration would probably prefer to do that without yast. #13: Martin Pluskal (pluskalm) (2014-12-02 12:45:53) Well apparently there are some people using yast -i (see http://www.reddit.com/r/openSUSE/comments/2nxj3s/error_when_installing_apach... ) #14: Lukas Ocilka (locilka) (2014-12-02 13:23:18) (reply to #13) Yes, looks like we need to educate users to use zypper. `zypper in apache2` does the very same as yast -i apache2, but better. + #17: Robert Klein (kleinrob) (2015-11-20 11:48:15) + I actually use the command line interface of yast in my scripts, e.g. + * yast proxy disable + * yast2 proxy set http="...." + another script + * yast2 lan list + * yast2 lan show id=$id + * yast2 lan edit id=${id} bootproto=static ip=${ip_addr} + prefix=${prefix} + * yast2 firewall services add zone=EXT service=service:apache2 + other scripts (not all in the same script) + * ast2 nis disable + * yast2 groups add groupname=$GROUP gid=$GID type=local + * yast2 users add username=$USERNAME uid=$UID cn="USER NAME + * yast dns-server zones add name=bubaben.example.com masterserver=192. + 168.100.10 zonetype=master + and so on. Documentation is almost not existing though. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/318203