Hint: :q!
Sister communities:
Community rules (click to expand)
1. Follow the site-wide rules
sudo in Windows.Please report posts and comments that break these rules!
Important: never execute code or follow advice that you don't understand or can't verify, especially here. The word of the day is credibility. This is a meme community -- even the most helpful comments might just be shitposts that can damage your system. Be aware, be smart, don't remove France.
Let the apologists have a field day in the comments.
I'd give my left nut to have a GUI for managing the icons in the GNOME dock. Like, where is the binary for this icon? Can I edit this .desktop file from the right click menu, please? FML.
Plasma 6 settings GUI more capable than windows settings idk wym. Only thing I've had to edit in the terminal in the last several months has been automount on a hard drive.
Yeah, some distros have GUIs for system settings, like openSUSE and Mageia, but advanced users will often even take that as a reason to not use those distros, because they themselves don't need that on their system. And because not many advanced users use these distros, it's hard to recommend them for noobs, because it makes it more difficult to find help resources. Kind of a stupid situation...
Here's one:
Audio jacks. I have a 5.1 system, and to use it properly I have to install HDAJackRetask. You can't just specify 5.1 surround sound from the distro's standard audio settings menu.
sysctl, anyone?
Windows users are used to everything being so locked down that it's virtually impossible to mess up your system... lots of this stuff is in config files because exposing it for everyday users would be asking for people to completely brick their workflow.
If you put every option in a GUI, there would be so much stuff that nobody could find anything.
That's why you put it in 3, with no rhyme or reason for which goes where
I think you just discribed windows I know my head hurts looking at GPOs.
No Windows put everything in a GUI, then added a second GUI that didnβt quite have all the functionality of the first one so kept both around, then despite the second GUI existing for nearly 10 years it still couldnβt do everything the first one could and then they completely redesigned it rather than just introducing all the functionality from the first GUI, but they removed some of the functionality of the second GUI from the first GUI so now both GUIs are incomplete and full of functions that just link to the other GUI
I'd just like one standard for all config files. Yaml, json, whatever...let's just choose something and standardize.
I used to dislike editing text config files but once you have one written you've got a template for the future. So long as the documentation is throughly written it's not too bad to follow.
Linux config in YAML
God no, please spare me
*Laughs in CLI.
Also TOML lol
Yeah, I've definitely grown to like TOML, especially after spending hours trying to edit a giant (nested) YAML file...
I didn't realize the indentation in TOML was purely aesthetic.
This
[servers]
[servers.alpha]
ip = "10.0.0.1"
dc = "eqdc10"
[servers.beta]
ip = "10.0.0.2"
dc = "eqdc10"
equals this
[servers]
[servers.alpha]
ip = "10.0.0.1"
dc = "eqdc10"
[servers.beta]
ip = "10.0.0.2"
dc = "eqdc10"
which equals this
{
"servers": {
"alpha": {
"ip": "10.0.0.1",
"dc": "eqdc10"
},
"beta": {
"ip": "10.0.0.2",
"dc": "eqdc10"
}
}
}
You ever try to put together a GUI? I absolutely get why they look like crap! Although I have been having fun playing around with egui.
What people expect:
β Fix my box
βFuck my shit up
What we would get: System Kernel Interface
π³ Regex Recursion
π³ Kernel Language (Internal) [Dropdown: en-us, Dvorak, binary, Klingon, non-binary (Borg analog), Esperanto]
π³ Ignore LPT on fire
π³ Memory hole on sysctl
π³ Mansplain man(8)
All the settings changes should be config files. GUI is dumb Pooh.
The janky cobbled-together UIs straight out of 1994 are part of the charm!
Not entirely accurate since the majority of Linux system settings are in fact GUI settings, you forget the Linux under the hood is all pure text based meaning it's just GUI settings and worse GUI settings.
Wait, do you argue that a terminal emulator is just another GUI but with a huge text box? π
if you can't use it without a monitor it's graphical
So, if I switch the terminal output back to my dot matrix printer instead of my monitor, like back in the day, it's not graphical right?
If we want to be technical even the terminal itself is a GUI just not a very interactive one, technically anything(most things) outside of the grub loader, bios and drives are part of the gui, I will concede that that is not a very useful definition but when dealing with edge cases like terminal emulators you would have to say it is indeed part of the gui at least technically.
It's called a terminal emulator because it emulates graphically what used to output to a printer at the console of a mainframe. Then you got CRT monitors. The mainframes like the PDP-10 would output to a printer or CRT monitor. This was your terminal. A printer writes the output from the mainframe 1 character at a time, left to right, top to bottom. The CRT monitors were made to do the same. Obviously before outputting to a printer or CRT monitor, the output would show on a set of lights on the console. If you watched them change enough, you would know where you were in your program as it ran (obviously something only doable because the opcodes were not running in parallel through super scalar pipelines in the Ghz). With printers and monitors, you could increase the amount of feedback you get from the running or exiting program and give input to the system via a keyboard.
So, the terminal is not "technically" a GUI. We do use a GUI to emulate a terminal which receives the actual terminal output from the system and then displays it for you. They are not the same thing at all. GUI is a paradigm for what you display on a Monitor for the user to interact with. Modern monitors are fast enough that they can and do work well with the GUI paradigm. You definitely wouldn't be sending GUI context to a printer.
Technically a terminal is a physical crt or phosphate or whatever old kind of monitor they had back then, the dot matrix printer was a tty or teletype system, the terminal emulator is emulating the the old dumb analog monitor on top of the digital os not necessarily the tty although the terminal was doing the same function as the tty, so a raw terminal would be graphical... I guess we are going so far back the words are losing meaning but the terminal emulator which runs on top of the GUI classifies as part of the GUI as much as notepad or word
"Is the X server part of the GUI" is a lot like the "Is water wet" debate