If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Clear Linux Switches From Xfce To GNOME, Benchmarks
That's just saying that CLI will never change (and I hope so as I don't like script breakage), does not contradict his first statements that you still need both GUI and CLI.
Which GUI? The ones that are trendy at the moment, until they fall out of fashion and replaced by something else.
Why do GUIs keep getting replaced? Answers on a postcard, please...
Which CLI? The ones that are trendy at the moment, until they fall out of fashion and replaced by something else.
Why do CLIs keep getting replaced? Answers on a postcard, please...
fixed.
Can I please remind you that there are more shells (which is a command line interface program) than GUIs?
sh, dash, bash, ash, zsh, fish, tcsh, plus all proprietary shells used in commercial products like for example Cisco's or whatever else. Each brand has its own shell with its own commands, the basic ones are kinda similar (also because busibox) but apart from them it's all custom.
And even the POSIX ones have differences so you can't use full features if you want your script to be portable.
What does not change (usually) is the interface within the same shell while it gets updated.
Counting POSIX-incompatible ones? No, you may not.
Request rejected. It was a rhetorical question, you are not allowed to shift goalposts in your favor.
You didn't specify POSIX anywhere so any shell is fair game.
Anyway, there are like 8 posix-compliant shells (with extensions) if not more, so even if you shifted goalposts my post is still valid.
Not to mention that actual CLI programs can have more/different arguments (like for example busybox vs gnu tools or some CLI tools in embedded distros or MacOS).
Comment