On 2008-02-06, Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@aol.com> wrote:
> Tom Newton wrote:
>
>> And the shell script "wizards" are much easier to understand and
>> modify. Try doing that with a KDE "wizard". When they fail you
>> are up the creek without a paddle.
>
> Mere scripts only tell you *what* goes on, but not *why*.

That's simply nonsense. A script can include the output of
any utility or app providing any information needed.

> No much difference between scripts and source code,

Except that the script (I'm talking shell scripts here) is a
plain text file that can be much more easily comprehended
and modified by the average user and doesn't need to be
compiled.

> it depends on the will and skills of the author, to comment his
> work.

All good scripts and source code are well-commented.

>> As for the purely manual approach, the information is
>> available to edit the text configuration files is available.
>> Easily available. On your box or on the web.
>
> Descriptions have a general problem: made by somebody familiar
> with the subject, they can lack essential information for
> newbies, and made by unrelated people, they may lack important
> information in general.

No kidding. They can also be perfect and tailored specifically
for newbies, as a great deal of the docs available are.

It's ironic that at a time when we have super-fast internet connections
and incredibly sophisticated search engines and endless gigabytes
of material on the web of direct relevance to running Linux,
that so many Linux runners are moving in the opposite direction:

Towards becoming mindless appliance operators dependent upon
artificial user-interfaces like KDE (the Korporate Desktop
Environment).

If they keep it up, they will soon find that their software
is not free or open source and that they are just running
Windows with a different brand name on it, for all intents
and purposes.

Too damned many couch potatos from the Windows world are
running Linux now because of the corporate-backed yuppy geeks
at KDE/Gnome/freedesktop.org.

All they want to do is play video games and watch videos
and listen to music.

I wish they'd go back to Windows and stay there.

They aren't running Linux. KDE is running it for them.

>>>A GUI can offer only valid settings for every parameter, or
>>>validate user entries, and can present context sensitive help.
>>
>>
>> So can a shell script "wizard".
>
> ACK in general, NACK in details.

A shell script "wizard" can do anything a compiled "wizard"
can. Simple fact.

If you don't know that, you are not qualified to be discussing
this subject.


>> The GUI exists with, or without, KDE/Gnome. It existed a long
>> time before they were even conceived.

Long before Linux existed, as a matter-of-fact.

>
> I fell in love with GUIs with my Atari, many years ago. No
> matter what name it has ;-)

I run a GUI. But I don't run KDE/Gnome. And I can do anything
that anyone running one of those monstrosities can do.

They are just collections of applications with a common graphical
theme. Nothing else.

Tom

--
calhobbit (at)
gmail [DOT] com