Patrick Shanahan wrote:
* Linda Walsh
[05-07-10 07:45]: No! Linux is case-sensitive. And linux is famous for not being user-friendly. Something many
Patrick Shanahan wrote: people would like to see changed.
Yes, the command-line is known for not being user-friendly, but not the gooie. The gooie *has* changed that.
I don't use the GUI often. I use a Win7 front-end & linux back-end. I know I'm weird that way. But I still have ease-of-use issues that I have 'developed' (typing over-use) and know that typing caps is more stressful on joints/RSI probs. I also know that remember what is capped and what is not is a royal pain when programming in Perl. Having used a linux desktop for years before being forced more out of necessity than anything else to switch to Win (98->2k->XP; good for many years; but now '7' due to memory constraints). It was far easier on wrists/hands than linux GUI for 'me' (can't speak for others). However, not using the GUI, I'd prefer to see ease of use brought to CLI. Thus I switch to BASH and use auto-completion. For those shunning strict compliance, they stay with bourne shell, no doubt? ;)
"Bill Gates logic", now that's an oxymoron! But, yes, things need to be backward compatable. Poor interface ??
Oxymoron..yeah...but can you argue w/success? 'Ultimately'? ;) But he's made his dime on enforcing backwards compat for everything up through XP. Was when he broke backward compat in Vista that doodoo hit fan. But Vista was sacrificial lamb -- Win7 is no better in previous-OS compat, just that it wasn't the OS breaking the ground. It is compat w/vista! If it wasn't for some real bad perf issues in Win7, it would be superior to XP in every way. But it had to break compat to be there. It would have to relax DRM and get rid of a DRM layer to get up to XP speeds, not something that MS of MS-NBC relationship (on wane) or MS of 'we wanna be your bridge to media companies' is likely to do.
Are you a windows-counter agent?
Are you daft?
--- On occasion, but I notice you evade my question w/a question. Interesting. ;)
You need to think about what experienced users (ah, that would be me, who's used unix/linux since late 80's) can deal with, and what would make linux more popular and optimize the result.
Why, you poor young thing. :^) To be so young.
?! Um You could have used it @ AT&T in early 70's, but outside of schools, it didn't exist until early 80's. Sun was formed in '81 and used the school-distro from Berkeley, though it started at Stanford, but I'm sure you know all that history, as "everyone" does... *cough*. You can't be much "older" in unix/linux -- it didn't exist. But whether or not punch cards used to be used as input -- I would't consider that a good reason for requiring them to be used in future designs. The cli is populated by humans. Not machines. Backwards compatibility is not as paramount. Bill Gates wanted to keep same interfacesin Windows because he thought his customers were incapable of adapting. I certainly DON't see as being the case among unix users, depsite some people's feelings that CLI operations should remain case sensitive. It is poor design to rely on case as a differentiator between different functions. If you were to program constantly re-using variable names that vary only in 'case', you'd be cursed by any maintainers. Why? because it's difficult to maintain. Why is the CLI-interface any different? If it was in any program -- someone would say "re-write the bad portions". Why shouldn't we strive to make CLI operations the best possible as well? If you/we want case sensitivity/or not, it a global ENV var -- that might allow both sides to have what they want without having to type something 'extra' in at a command prompt.
It's a simple multivariate equation. Solve for maximum. zypper isn't a program with a long history. There are few compatibility issues other than people being stuck in their old ways. But if you cater to them, no progress will ever be made.
You see *only* the small picture. Zypper must accept what the rest of linux accepts or it is different and in this case, that is bad, leads to confusion.
It does accept what the rest of unix accepts -- and it provides 'more'. It was the 'more' w/out telling me that confused me, in fact.
Being the person bitten by this instance of the bug (because I'm not used to differing case being accepted by two different package managers on linux, I am stating what would have made the situation acceptable to me -- as someone who as used unix and/or linux for over 20 years. A simple notification that it had ignored my case to make a match would be fine with me.
Agreed, it should not have ignored case and should have reported that it acted contrary to expected.
I didn't say it shouldn't have ignored case -- but that it should have *told* me it was doing so (i.e. doing something other than traditional behavior). I feel that giving warning of non-tradition behavior is enough -- I don't feel that it has to adhere to traditional behavior. Why wouldn't the warning be sufficient (like either of us are going to do anything about this other than hash-at it here...;) )
It would also make it more user friendly, which I think is a good thing.
User friendly is a "good thing" but not when it deviates from the "norm".
In this world, 'user friendly' is not the norm. I see 'user hostile' 'user abuse', 'despising "users"', but not 'user friendly'. You may not be able to have 'user friendly' that doesn't deviate from the norm...(on so many levels)...
You aren't capable of adapting?
I have been *adapting* for 69 years :^).
Congrats...Sounds like you are ideal to help user in a future not shackled by the past! That is what you are saying, yes? :-) (Personally, I would like to turn on case-insensitivity on my file systems...I wonder if that option actually works (xfs)). -linda -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org