On 2008/10/29 17:18 (GMT+0200) Jonathan Carter (highvoltage) composed: > Felix Miata wrote:
>>> I haven't used MC since late 1990's and I can't really say I miss it! I >>> perform lots of file-managing tasks every day and I'm quite happy with >>> Nautilus. >> How nice for you that you've never had broken X, and never will have, and >> never will need to help someone else with broken X. > I'm sorry, but you seem to be missing the point. Firstly, there's not so > much argument about how useful mc is. mc powerful and useful to many. > I've been using it for quite a few things since 1999. I use "it" routinely, since 1986, when I first discovered NC, instead of using a bunch of other things I don't need to have or learn precisely because I have "it". Knowing how to use OFMs has obviated more than token need to learn tools non-OFM bash users take for granted, and GUI users have no knowledge of or interest in. > What you have to realise is that the space on the Ubuntu installation > disc is very, very limited. This is ancient history that comes up every time some again asks to have it included by default. Those who don't use an OFM cannot appreciate the extraordinary value of an OFM. Thus, the tyranny of the majority rules neither mc nor any other OFM can live on a live buntu CD. Klaus Knopper knows its value, which makes his space-limited live CDs the live Linux media of choice for those in the know. > You're hitting quite hard on that point and I'm not quite sure > how mc would make it easier for users to fix an X server. Automatic tools for fixing X are nice when they work, but it's often the case that various and sundry things that a minor text edit would fix are impossible to fix with a fancy tool. Similar for networking. Though you may have X working, a telephone fix is often much easier navigating to a text file and changing a character or three than explaining how to grunge through yet another X with different menus and app names than the last. > That's what > things like the failsafe X session are for, unless you're refering to > mcedit being a more intuitive editor for new users? It's rare for any tool to do more than a few things well, if even more than one. OFMs are such exceptions. The built-in FTP for fetching broken packages is easy to use, as that process is the same as fetching a file on a local filesystem, which is just as easy as in a GUI, having the advantage of a GUI in visually depicting the relationship of files and directories to each other, and making navigation a breeze. That an intuitive text editor is built in goes without saying. A couple of keystrokes, and you have an in place copy of the original, after which you edit and test, and copy the original back if it didn't help, with another very few keystrokes, quite unlike cp/mv/vi, etc. Helping a user in need over the phone to fix things like X or networking is easier if you can limit to one easy to use tool that requires a lot fewer steps to accomplish a difficult task. When you do it in mc you've taught a user to help himself, but that learning is only later useful in an environment that includes that tool. Really, it's a total waste of time to discuss OFMs with OFM non-users. People can't get what they're about if they don't use them. Only with routine use can anyone grasp just how valuable they really are, and now indispensable they are to those few who do depend on them. -- "Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak, and slow to become angry." James 1:19 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
