On Mon, 05 Dec 2016 20:46:22 -0700, Michael Torrie wrote: > On 12/05/2016 08:27 PM, Wildman via Python-list wrote: >> On Mon, 05 Dec 2016 18:25:58 -0700, Michael Torrie wrote: >> >>> I think Python is a good choice for such a utility, but I agree it is >>> much better to rely on these external utilities as children to do the >>> platform-dependent work, rather than try to re-implement everything in >>> Python. A long time ago I wrote a simple wrapper to Popen that would >>> run a command and return the standard out and standard error to me. >> >> My rational is that all Linux distros are not created equal. >> One comes with one certain set of utilities and another can >> have different ones. I can't always depend on a given >> utility being there. And there is not way to know the >> names of same utility across all distros. This is especially >> a problem when comparing .rpm with .deb based distros. > > Well this is a problem regardless of which scripting language you choose > and the solutions will be the same.
It is a problem only if you depend on the utility. > Personally for a script of this type, I'd probably stick with Bash > myself. In most cases I would agree with that, but, in this case my goal is learning Python. I did write a couple of programs with Bash several months ago to learn a little about it. One will take an image and convert it into an X-Face header and the other will take an image and convert it into a Face header. I later wrote GUI versions of the programs with Python and Tkinter. BTW, I don't depend on programming for a living. I would be in bad shape if I did. It is a hobby that I greatly enjoy. And, being in my later years, it keeps my mind sharp(er). > Which by the way is what inxi is written in. Yes, I was aware of that. It's over 12,000 lines! -- <Wildman> GNU/Linux user #557453 The cow died so I don't need your bull! -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
