“When you quit picking on Windows and start picking on Unix vendors for not being “Linuxy” enough, you’ve become a true zealot. However, if you consider administration, education, software development, and the labor market (at least in the U.S.), the notion of Linux being the de facto standard Unix starts to look a little less goofy.” Read the rest of the article at Linux.com.
SysAdmin to SysAdmin: Linux is the Unix reference implementation
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Using a non-Linux unix flavor is like going to a foreign country. The toilet being simply a hole in the ground and there being no paper can be likened to the `ps` command not supporting the parameters you’ve come to expect and bash being missing in action
It’s fun for a while, but it feels good to get home.
Your comfort level depends on what you know, and how well you know it.
command –too-much-typing-required-to-do-simple-things
Which distro?
alias simple = “command –too-much-typing-required-to-do-simple-things”
Easy and effective, simple to remember.
Case in point: I use different options for mplayer (from the command line) depending on the types of videos I’m watching. A small collection of aliases helps me cut down on typing most options.
“command –too-much-typing-required-to-do-simple-things”
for every long option you have a shorter equivalent
At my school I often use my student accounts for hosting files or to test my Fortran programs on the hosted compilers. The machines to which I’ve had access are Suns and Alphas (I’m not sure if they are Compaq or Dec machines).
A very useful way to determine the size of my files is to use “df -h” or “du -sh”, where the “-h” flag means “human readable”, i.e., give size information in terms of kB or MB or somesuch.
These other UNIX machines do not support this flag, and return information in units of filesystem blocks. This is rather useless to me as I do not always know what the block size is for the filesystem, and I’m not especially fast at multiplying the resulting numbers. They do however, uspport a “-k” flag, which yields info in terms of “1000 kB” blocks, though this is still somewhat less than desirable and still not as simple to read.
So, the GNU/Linux toolchain is often more featureful and useful for basic file and job management operations.
I agree. Being a zealot I have to install my GNU/Linux tools/libs on other UNIXes that I have to work with. Otherwise I feel uncomfortable. Even on Windows I have to install Cygwin to use my favorite tools.
System administration with Solaris and IRIX is also quite different. They are so similar but yet so different. So I wouldn’t mind Linux setting the standard. But I guess a lot of UNIX heads will be upset and say that Linux stiffles competition just like Windows.
Solaris 9 supports -h
for every long option you have a shorter equivalent
That’s only true for simpler, ancient programs. Take a look at more modern things like GPG.
Re: OoSync (IP: —.umd.edu) – Posted on 2004-05-12 21:01:41
alias simple = “command –too-much-typing-required-to-do-simple-things”
My point is that I shouldn’t have to.
That’s nice to know. My school machines give “SunOS 5.7” as a reply to uname, so they’re pretty old
RE: Secaps Evael
As a practical matter, it is impossible to simlify every combination of tasks that a user may wish to try. If you perform a repetative task using GPG from the command line, then a small script, function, or alias to simplify that task is useful. Your particular use of GPG may not be something the developers can simplify a priori without your further input or help.
My personal experience is that many command line tools require you to give them enough information to correctly specify what it is you wish to do. Usually, they don’t require any more than that, and creating methods to deal with repetative tasks is quite easy and applies uniformly to all other command line tools. Perhaps your experience is different or a particular tool strays from this. I’d be interested to know of such experiences.
“Take a look at more modern things like GPG. ”
like what option. what gpg are you talking about
like what option. what gpg are you talking about
GnuPG, and you can find your own example options. It has a man page you know.
”
GnuPG, and you can find your own example options. It has a man page you know.”
i didnt find any so hard to type options in gnu pg and importing and exporting keys is not what you do on a daily basis anyway.
ls,cp mv and stuff is what is regular in linux.
ZSH has parameter expansion and global aliases.
“ZSH has parameter expansion and global aliases.”
As the last versions of bash (programmable completion). Juste put that in yoour .bashrc:
# enable programmable completion features (you don’t need to enable
# this, if it’s already enabled in /etc/bash.bashrc).
if [ -f /etc/bash_completion ]; then
. /etc/bash_completion
fi
Under debian, you have completion for apt-get, make, this kind of stuff. Really nice
Linux has tools? I thought it was just a kernel. Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t it GNU that has all the tools?
If I’m not mistaken BASH is GNU software and can be installed on Solaris, *BSD, and others. There are other tools GNU tools that can be used on other systems as well.
du -h works the way I want it on FreeBSD with human readable output, although I don’t think it’s GNU.
So really, is it the Linux that is setting the standard for administrators or is it the GNU tools?
Of course there are system differences between Linux and Unix (includeing *BSD, Solaris, etc) that administrators will have to adapt to, such as package management, system configuration (which changes from distribution to distribution – highly annoying), and stuff like that. In that regard, which distribution is setting the standard?
I can see for that for developers they might have adapt to Linux-ism’s and stuff like that for writing software, but most Linux software is portable.
So what am I not getting here? Please explain.
I miss it. You notice little things like that, and updatedb. Anyone know how to update the slocate database in unix, or is there a find command (I just now have to work with it).
Doesn’t anyone hash out bash scripts for repetitive tasks.. 5 posts straight about how hard the linux cli is.. That’s what scripts are for… 🙂
Your right, it’s GNU that’s the standard, which is ironic because the acronym is for “GNU’s Not UNIX!”
At uni, I hear people refer to “the linux machines”. Only problem is, we dont have any. I correct them and tell them that what they are really referring to are the xterminals which connect to a solaris server.
response? “yeah, same thing”.
Fact is, most people these days have heard of linux, so anything that is not windows is linux. Including other unices.
Yeah, it’s really gnu/linux he is talking about. GNU toolset alongside the linux kernel.
Then you should use bash_completion
, long parameters are nice, the hard thing is just to write them, and you can avoid that with bash_completion.
Old Unix are somewhat clunky compared with Linux
Mac OS X supports the -h flag for df and du. The man pages state that the OS X implementations are BSD tools so it’s not just the GNU tools that have the nifty extras.
“Using a non-Linux unix flavor is like going to a foreign country. The toilet being simply a hole in the ground and there being no paper can be likened to the `ps` command not supporting the parameters you’ve come to expect and bash being missing in action
It’s fun for a while, but it feels good to get home.”
That’s exactly how I feel when I go to Linux. Its like a being a salt water fish in fresh water, it feels like water but it ain’t just right. I picked FreeBSD ages ago for comfort level, and have never felt comfortable with Linux. Don’t forget around 1/2 or mor ISP’s run non-Linux, especially BSD flavors.
BTW, I read this web site for OS/NEWS, not zealocy, when the article itself says zealot in the first sentance, I get turned off. I want interviews, evaluations, and news, not frothing at the mouth that zeolots will produce. Take zeolacy to its own web sites such as linux.com or linux advocacy news group and crow there to each other. Leave the other half of the world in peace.
Anything besides bourne shell and C is extra. Real admins adapt and the great ones improvise, either get tough or stick with that mcse, the guy is spot on.
…”SysAdmin to SysAdmin: Linux is the Unix reference implementation”……from linux.com….
This isn’t objetive..
AIX 5L (the L stands for Linux)has all the GNU userland and all the stuff you would find in a full Linux distro – just the kernel is different.
“command –too-much-typing-required-to-do-simple-things”
I’ll take
“useradd”
over
Start -> Settings -> Control Pannel -> Administrative Tools -> Computer Management -> Local users and groups -> Users -> Action -> New User…
any day.
useradd
Heh. I was comparing GNU long options to BSD’s not so clunky ones.
Use what makes you happy right?
There are lots of GNU tools that are *nice* to have on a commercial Unix. But beyond, that each Linux distro is different and is aimed at a different audience. This makes it hard to build a unified *Linux* standard. The good thing about the commercial Unices, is that they had to pass the UNIX98, Posix, etc standards to be called Unix. Meaning that commands, system calls, and interfaces have to conform a set standard. Now, each commercial Unix will add it’s own features to commands (i.e. the -h option in Solaris 9 for ls, du, df, etc.), but the standard options work the same. The same is true of system calls and interfaces. It’s a lot easier to port software that’s ANSI and POSIX compliant between Unices than it is between Linux and any given Unix. This causes constant porting issues.
Making Linux a standard won’t fix these problems, because who’s standard do you go by? Red Hat? SuSe? Debian? Slackware?
So in the end, it’s a nice idea, but it goes against the *Unix* philosophy. Each commercial Unix is different in how it’s administered, configured, installed, etc. Just as each Linux distro is different in the same ways. This is what makes the differences between all of these products and each one is suited to a particular audience.
The GNU tools are great and I agree that they should be included in addition to what’s included in a commercial Unix. I think that Sun has done a great job at this, by placing GNU tools in /usr/sfw/bin. That way, if you want to use them, just add it to your path and there you go:)
A lot of linux zealots may think that their way is the best. But, without differences/enhancements to products how do you expect ppl to make money or for one Unix or Linux distro to stand out for any particular task or requirement? It’s this “everything must be like linux or be linux” type thinking that will damage the acceptance of Linux for the general public, because it’s the same kind of thinking that Microsoft has. People don’t want that, they want choices.
From a sysadmin point of view. Each Linux is very different in how it’s administered and I find that to be sad, but it’s life. I started out with Slackware over 10 years ago. I’ve tried many of the other Linux distros over time and each is very different. This is not any different from how things are in the commercial arena. Solaris is very different from Tru64 or even AIX. Yet they all conform to what their respective creators thought was *right*. This is the same in Linux.
The Unix standards are a good thing, in the sense that they specify how things should behave and work and leave implementation up to the vendor. Having GNU tools is a nice way to insure that things work nicely between the two. Beyond that, the differences between how things are administered prevent much in the way of integration without a lot of hard work. While it would be nice, it’s just not going to happen.
Each flavor requires a set of skills that not only encompass the OS, but the addon products from its vendor and from its partners. For example, most jobs involving Solaris require experience with Sun’s products (Sun Cluster, Mail, Calendar, LDAP, etc..) and Veritas products (VxVM and VxFS). As where on Tru64 you’d be expected to know it’s related products (TruCluster, AdvFS, etc.) So the toolkit for each flavor is also different.
The Linux community should work towards a standard that is generic and not distro specific, that way the commercial vendors can tack it ontop of their other certifications. I know there have have been several attempts, but none have really succeeded.
Besides, it’s a good thing to know different Unices. Speaking as a sysadmin, it’s crucial in this economy. Each Unix or Linux distro is suited to particular tasks and there isn’t a catch-all product out there, other-wise everyone would use it;) And the authors’ perspective on how many universities use Linux to teach Unix, is flawed. While many universities use Linux to teach Unix to some degree, there is a great deal lacking when teaching administration of Unix out there today. Most focus on getting around at the cli level, scripting, and then using those skills for programming with perl, c, c++, etc. The classes I’ve seen for administration focus on the concepts and those that are too focused on a particular flavor are only usefull if the student will only work with that flavor. When I took courses at a college, we used Ultrix(yikes! I know), for all the basic and advanced courses and then used it with Slackware to teach the admin course. It was a good thing to have a balance, because all things are not created equal. And while most of the students in that class were either admins or programmers, they all worked on different OS’s. I think it’s wrong to teach Unix by only exposing students to just Linux. It’s important to expose them to different Unices and Linux distros. Sadly, this is not done, and it’s up to the brave student to go out and learn more on their own in the work place or through vendor training.
There has been a lot of talk and some work towards standardizing a curriculum for sysadmins to transform it into a degreed profession. I think it’s a great idea and it seriously needs work. The bad part of about many colleges is that they are behind the technology in this area and are not able to keep up. So by the time a student walks down the razor blade of life, they will find that their skills are out-dated already. The transistion to Java for example, has been slow for many institutions, but that has not slowed the demand for Java skills in the workplace. It’s difficult for colleges and universities to keep up and regretfully, it affects the students profitability and the economy as well.
Something to remember.. Linux is just a tool like any other OS or program. It’s what you do with it that makes the difference. It’s sysadmins responsibility to manage and help others to use that tool, whether it’s Solaris, Linux, MVS, or NT.
There isn’t a universal tool that does everything for an automobile mechanic, otherwise I’m sure Sears would have the market cornered. Instead they use a wide range of tools. This is the same in the business world. An OS is nothing more than a tool that enables that business to run software that impowers it to do things. That’s why large corporations use all sorts of computers and OS’s, they all fit a certain set of tasks. And that’s the beauty of it all. I don’t want everything to be the same, where’s the challenge then?
http://tongwen.mozdev.org
mozilla chinese simplified traditional converter switcher home page homepage html