Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Magnus Therning]

kendell clark via arch-general  writes:

> hi
>
> I took a brief look at powershell today when I found out it had been 
> open sourced. I looked at some of the c# source code files and they all 
> read that they're licensed under the apache license, version 2.0. I 
> haven't read that thing, it's probably full of legalese I wouldn't 
> understand, but I bet it's probably lax on the patent front or microsoft 
> wouldn't have chosen it. So we could, theoretically, get into trouble 
> packaging it for arch, although I don't think it's likely. Of course I 
> am not a lawyer or a programmer, this is just my two scents.

AFAIU the Apache license is actually rather strict with patents:
http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/187958/apache-license-and-patents#187961

/M

-- 
Magnus Therning  OpenPGP: 0x927912051716CE39
email: mag...@therning.org   jabber: mag...@therning.org
twitter: magthe   http://therning.org/magnus

$my_args = shift;
system("gcc $my_args");
print "I prefer C\n";
 — Robert Dieterich's contribution to the 2004 Perl Haiku Contest,
Haikus in Perl - 'Dishonerable Mention' winner


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 16:40:32 -0500, Yaro Kasear wrote:
>People who don't know PS would still have to look up how to do 
>the same thing on there.

That is already part of my point of view. If we have a problem and don't
know how to solve it, we not necessarily use the keywords "bash", "dash"
or something similar, but we would likely search for "Linux". If one of
the keywords is "Linux", we more likely will get help in using Linux
and BSD tools and very unlikely hints how to satisfy our needs using a
Microsoft tool. If we are already used to something, that is portable,
IOW provided by default for most, if not all Linux distros' default
installs and perhaps BSD, too, I doubt that many of us are willing to
use a tool from Microsoft, to get rid of the things we are already used
to.

This second mail should be my last mail regarding this thread. I only
wanted to point out, that I'm a little bit surprised. I'm not against
this PowerShell, but I doubt that many Linux users will care about it,
not regarding reservations against Microsoft, just because there are
already established "standard" shells and "alternative" shells and all
of them can be used with additional commands, scripts and aliases.

I doubt that Microsoft now provides something that we were missing. I'm
surprised that this did cause such a long discussion.

"PowerShell is an automation platform and scripting language for
Windows and Windows Server" -
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/powershell

We already could read that some like to maintain Windows servers using
Linux, everyone else unlikely cares about different ways to e.g. use
"ls".

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Yaro Kasear]

Consider also that getting PowerShell doesn't solve the "how do I" 
problem. People who don't know PS would still have to look up how to do 
the same thing on there. If you're already familiar with Linux, and 
chances are you are if you're using Archlinux, then PowerShell won't 
solve any problems for you in almost every case.


It's neat that PowerShell is ported now, but I do scratch my head and 
wonder what niche it will fill that would merit anything more than 
placement on the AUR.


Conrad

On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 4:33 PM, Ralf Mardorf  
wrote:

www.my-favoured-search-engine.com

Search term:

  linux shell how to do this and that

If you don't know how to find the size and name of the three largest
files in a directory, but only of those files that have a size value
that is a prime number in MiB and a file name that does contain the
letters "a" and "f", but does not include the numbers "3" and "6", you
more likely will find hints how to do this by common used Linux and 
BSD

tools, than hints how to do this with a Microsoft shell.

This is not an argument pro or con PowerShell. I don't care
if it is in a repo or not. I just wonder about arguing pro PowerShell
by providing examples that are solvable by either already having the
Linux knowledge or by using a search engine with the keyword Linux, to
get Linux knowledge.

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Ralf Mardorf]

www.my-favoured-search-engine.com

Search term:

  linux shell how to do this and that

If you don't know how to find the size and name of the three largest
files in a directory, but only of those files that have a size value
that is a prime number in MiB and a file name that does contain the
letters "a" and "f", but does not include the numbers "3" and "6", you
more likely will find hints how to do this by common used Linux and BSD
tools, than hints how to do this with a Microsoft shell.

This is not an argument pro or con PowerShell. I don't care
if it is in a repo or not. I just wonder about arguing pro PowerShell
by providing examples that are solvable by either already having the
Linux knowledge or by using a search engine with the keyword Linux, to
get Linux knowledge.

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Eli Schwartz via arch-general]

On 08/19/2016 02:06 PM, Leonid Isaev wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 07:31:03PM +0200, Jérôme M. Berger wrote:
>> On 08/19/2016 03:28 AM, Hunter Connelly via arch-general wrote:
>>> Bash:ls -l | sed 's/ \+/,/g' | cut -d',' -f 5,9 | sort -g | tail -3
>>
>> -->ls -sS | head -4 | tail -3
>>
>>> PowerShell:  ls -file | sort -pr length | select length, name -l 3
> 
> Since when ls(1) et al are a part of bash? Are you guys comparing apples with
> oranges, i.e. bash + coreutils and powershell? 
> 

I think the original point by Hunter Connelly was that PowerShell uses
.NET objects, versus bash as a text stream-based shell.

So apparently, because there is no "find the largest three files"
utility, bash requires ridiculous workarounds like parsing the output of
`ls` and piping it through four different tools for filtering text.

But PowerShell can be told how to treat objects in one or two
easily-decipherable (but verbose) commands.

...

We now have multiple disproofs that show how bash does not suffer for
its textness and lack of objects...
Because `ls` has its own ability to format *and sort* by name +
filesize. But I still prefer the elegance of `find`. Especially the fact
that `find` can specify depth and exclude directories.

In short, we don't need (verbose) PowerShell objects if we actually know
how to use (non-verbose) coreutils properly, therefore bash suffices.

Since bash is more pleasant to type than PowerShell (in the opinion of
many, please no one respond just to point out that *they* prefer
PowerShell) and bash has been used, on all OSes, for a lot longer...
And it is just as capable, if you know what you are doing...

PowerShell has no real justification for catching on in a major way.
Except for people who already use PowerShell on Windows, especially to
manage Windows computers from Linux rather than having to use PowerShell
in a Windows VM.

...

Many people will dislike PowerShell merely because it comes from
Microsoft, and there is a lot of well-deserved dislike and mistrust for
anything Microsoft offers, I am sure a lot of people will not want it in
the AUR. But anyone can contribute to the AUR, even Microsoft
themselves... so they will just have to live with it.

On pure practicality, I doubt it will gain enough popularity to earn a
TU sponsorship into [community]. So really, stop worrying about it,
y'all. ;)

-- 
Eli Schwartz

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Jayesh Badwaik]

On Friday, 19 August 2016 12:06:42 CEST Leonid Isaev wrote:
> Since when ls(1) et al are a part of bash? Are you guys comparing
> apples with oranges, i.e. bash + coreutils and powershell?

Yes, somewhere in the thread it is already decided that powershell is 
more like python than bash.

-- 
Cheers
Jayesh Badwaik


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Leonid Isaev]

On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 07:31:03PM +0200, Jérôme M. Berger wrote:
> On 08/19/2016 03:28 AM, Hunter Connelly via arch-general wrote:
> > Bash:ls -l | sed 's/ \+/,/g' | cut -d',' -f 5,9 | sort -g | tail -3
> 
> -->ls -sS | head -4 | tail -3
> 
> > PowerShell:  ls -file | sort -pr length | select length, name -l 3

Since when ls(1) et al are a part of bash? Are you guys comparing apples with
oranges, i.e. bash + coreutils and powershell? 

-- 
Leonid Isaev
GPG fingerprints: DA92 034D B4A8 EC51 7EA6  20DF 9291 EE8A 043C B8C4
  C0DF 20D0 C075 C3F1 E1BE  775A A7AE F6CB 164B 5A6D

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Jérôme M . Berger]

On 08/19/2016 06:12 PM, Jayesh Badwaik wrote:
> Okay, then other factors come in, Google and Redhat "actively" develop free 
> software. This 
> means that if they first write some software and then put a patent 
> application for it, most 
> often, the patent application can be invalidated through prior art. 
> Considering patents 
> take almost 12 to 18 months on average, 

Doesn't matter: what matters when considering prior art re
patentability is the date of first filing (*), not the date when the
patent is granted, so they can file first and publish the next day
without invalidating their own patent.

Jerome

(*) Actually in the US, the law is even more permissive: you can patent
something that *you* have already published, provided that you file the
patent within six month of publishing the idea. Of course, this doesn't
apply if someone else published it first, and AFAIK it only applies in
the US.
-- 
mailto:jeber...@free.fr
http://jeberger.free.fr
Jabber: jeber...@jabber.fr



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Jérôme M . Berger]

On 08/19/2016 03:28 AM, Hunter Connelly via arch-general wrote:
> Bash:ls -l | sed 's/ \+/,/g' | cut -d',' -f 5,9 | sort -g | tail -3

-->ls -sS | head -4 | tail -3

> PowerShell:  ls -file | sort -pr length | select length, name -l 3


-- 
mailto:jeber...@free.fr
http://jeberger.free.fr
Jabber: jeber...@jabber.fr



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Simon Wydooghe via arch-general]

I'm gonna go with Guus on this one. Compared to batch, it's a blessing.
Looking at this from a pure practical standpoint, I would very much enjoy
being able to administer the odd Windows server from my Arch box. I'll
still hate every minute of it, but how nice would it be not to have to use
a Windows VM to do it? Not having to go through AUR to install PowerShell
would be even more helpful.

I don't see PowerShell getting any actual traction as a replacement for our
current shell options. But the addition of it to the Arch repos would make
my Arch box an even more powerful workhorse.

On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 6:04 PM, Guus Snijders via arch-general <
arch-general@archlinux.org> wrote:

> Op 19 aug. 2016 17:51 schreef "kendell clark via arch-general" <
> arch-general@archlinux.org>:
> >
> > hi
> >
> > I took a brief look at powershell today when I found out it had been open
> sourced. I looked at some of the c# source code files and they all read
> that they're licensed under the apache license, version 2.0. I haven't read
> that thing, it's probably full of legalese I wouldn't understand, but I bet
> it's probably lax on the patent front or microsoft wouldn't have chosen it.
> So we could, theoretically, get into trouble packaging it for arch,
> although I don't think it's likely. Of course I am not a lawyer or a
> programmer, this is just my two scents.
>
> Not much to worry about, any code that exceeds a two-word limit [1] is
> probably using some IBM patents. Software patents are a patently bad idea.
>
> As for powershell on Linux; it's a nice idea. I actually like it on Windows
> (especially next to batch/vbscript), and I might play with it a bit on
> Linux. The idea of managing Windows hosts from a Linux machine is quite
> interesting.
>
> [1]
> Yes, that was an arbitrary length.
>
> Mvg, Guus Snijders
>

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Jayesh Badwaik]

A beer from me too.

-- 
Cheers
Jayesh Badwaik


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Jayesh Badwaik]

On Friday, 19 August 2016 10:58:26 CEST Doug Newgard wrote:
> Which is also moot. Google and RedHat both have patent portfolios that
> they can and do defend.

Okay, then other factors come in, Google and Redhat "actively" develop free 
software. This 
means that if they first write some software and then put a patent application 
for it, most 
often, the patent application can be invalidated through prior art. Considering 
patents 
take almost 12 to 18 months on average, the other method of contribution 
(patenting first 
and then submitting is very difficult because of continuous exposure and at 
least 
somewhat fast changes in the code base of importat FOSS). 

There still exists one method which is, patent first, use the technique later 
to contribute 
code, however, that would be covered with
1. clean room implementation
2. won't stand up that favorably in the court, since the company itself 
willingly contributed 
the code. 

So, the point that is actually the point is, a company which is "actively" 
contributing to the 
already existing FOSS software and ecosystem is a much safer company to handle 
than a 
company which dumps a bunch of free software in public periodically. This is 
exacerbated 
by the fact that they *do* use patents to pursue their agenda.  

-- 
Cheers
Jayesh Badwaik


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Jayesh Badwaik]

On Friday, 19 August 2016 17:47:58 CEST Sebastiaan Lokhorst via arch-general 
wrote:
> Then Microsoft has given you a license to use that patent under the
> conditions listed above, and they cannot sue you.
> 
> Please correct me if I'm mistaken.

They can still sue you according to wikipedia. Almost free software licenses 
are 
only copyright, not patent. GPLv3 is an exception. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIT_License#Comparison_to_other_licenses

-- 
Cheers
Jayesh Badwaik


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Mauro Santos via arch-general]

On 19-08-2016 16:05, Sebastiaan Lokhorst via arch-general wrote:
> 2016-08-19 16:28 GMT+02:00 Mauro Santos via arch-general <
> arch-general@archlinux.org>:
>>
>> Make no mistake, they are after profits and do whatever it takes to keep
>> the money flowing
>>
> 
> So do Red Hat and Google. But does that keep us from using systemd or
> Chromium?
> 
> Please stop this unfounded, tinfoil hat "Micro$oft sucks!!11" whining.
> If there is an actual reason why you shouldn't use a product, please say
> so, but this "don't use it because Microsoft made it" nonsense is
> ridiculous.
> 

I'm not saying powershell doesn't have merit, and you are free to use it
as much as you want, but just like you have stated your opinion, I was
stating mine and as such it can be biased.

However, as others have pointed out, Microsoft has a very bad track
record, unlike Red Hat and Google. If Microsoft wants to be trusted they
will have to earn it.

-- 
Mauro Santos

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Sebastiaan Lokhorst via arch-general]

2016-08-19 17:36 GMT+02:00 Jayesh Badwaik :
>
> The point was patents.
>

A company can give out licenses to use a patent. If Microsoft would have
patented stuff in PowerShell, but then releases them with the following
license included:

> Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a
copy
> of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to
deal
> in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the
rights
> to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell
> copies of the Software ...

Then Microsoft has given you a license to use that patent under the
conditions listed above, and they cannot sue you.

Please correct me if I'm mistaken.

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Thibaut Marty]

On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 05:13:32PM +0200, Kwang Moo Yi via arch-general wrote:
> I mean, we don't even know all the people who contributed to the Linux
> Kernel are (well,.. I suppose technically you can, but you know what I
> mean).

True, and take in account that Microsoft guys had contributed to the
kernel mainly for virtualization. So maybe we should stop using Linux?

-- 
Thibaut

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Jayesh Badwaik]

On Friday, 19 August 2016 17:33:28 CEST Kwang Moo Yi via 
arch-general wrote:
> I can't help pointing out that PowerShell is MIT.

The point was patents. 

-- 
Cheers
Jayesh Badwaik


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Jeroen Mathon via arch-general]

Like that lwtter to opensource programmers?

On Fri, 19 Aug 2016, 17:09 Lee Fuller via arch-general, <
arch-general@archlinux.org> wrote:

> Microsoft have set a precedent of unnecessary vile arrogance towards Linux
> and the companies you cite here don't. I think that is fundamentally why
> most people have responded with scepticism.
>
>
>
>
>
> *Kind Regards,Lee Fuller*
>
> *PGP Fingerprint : *
> 4ACAEBA4B9EE1B3A075034302D5C3D050E6ED55A
>
> On 19 August 2016 at 16:05, Sebastiaan Lokhorst via arch-general <
> arch-general@archlinux.org> wrote:
>
> > 2016-08-19 16:28 GMT+02:00 Mauro Santos via arch-general <
> > arch-general@archlinux.org>:
> > >
> > > Make no mistake, they are after profits and do whatever it takes to
> keep
> > > the money flowing
> > >
> >
> > So do Red Hat and Google. But does that keep us from using systemd or
> > Chromium?
> >
> > Please stop this unfounded, tinfoil hat "Micro$oft sucks!!11" whining.
> > If there is an actual reason why you shouldn't use a product, please say
> > so, but this "don't use it because Microsoft made it" nonsense is
> > ridiculous.
> >
>

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Kwang Moo Yi via arch-general]

On 08/19/2016 05:16 PM, Jayesh Badwaik wrote:

systemd is GPL and not patented by Red Hat (I won't be surprised if it does 
potentially
probably violates some patents somewhere on the earth anyway), Chromium is BSD, 
MIT
etc.


I can't help pointing out that PowerShell is MIT.

Cheers,
Kwang

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Joerg Schilling]

Jayesh Badwaik  wrote:

> systemd is GPL and not patented by Red Hat (I won't be surprised if it does 
> potentially 
> probably violates some patents somewhere on the earth anyway), Chromium is 
> BSD, MIT 

If Sun owned patents on SMF, then it probably violates patents...

If so, this would be funny, as porting two filesystems (contract fs and object 
fs) to Linux did allow to use SMF and the existing SMF implementation grants to 
use existing patents.

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:jo...@schily.net(home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
   joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: 
http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.org/private/ 
http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/'

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Mauro Santos via arch-general]

On 19-08-2016 15:58, Lee Fuller via arch-general wrote:
> Mauro - Could I please quote you verbatim in a post on my personal website?
> It' gets very little traffic and so there's nothing really for you to gain,
> but I simply couldn't write anything better and feel that your quote
> summarises my own view on the news. The address is https://leefuller.io -
> please let me know if it's okay and whether you have a website address or
> any specific information you'd like me to include. I'd typically link to
> the mailman archive page for this thread.
> 
> Thanks very much, sorry if I've drawn your attention away from something
> more important.
> 
> Regards

I don't mind, and this is a public post I can't stop anyone from using it ;)

> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Kind Regards,Lee Fuller*
> 
> *PGP Fingerprint : *
> 4ACAEBA4B9EE1B3A075034302D5C3D050E6ED55A
> 
> On 19 August 2016 at 15:28, Mauro Santos via arch-general <
> arch-general@archlinux.org> wrote:
> 
>> On 19-08-2016 14:27, Stephen E. Baker via arch-general wrote:
>>> As a PowerShell user, it certainly has it's place, but it's place is
>>> pretty niche in the linux world, so +1 for the AUR.
>>
>> Given that it comes from Microsoft they must have some agenda to
>> fulfill, I'd rather not touch this even with a 10 foot pole, just like I
>> try to stay away for other MS products as much as I can. The AUR is
>> where it should stay, but even then they can spin it as PR fodder just
>> like canonical spun snappy coming to Arch Linux.
>>
>> Make no mistake, they are after profits and do whatever it takes to keep
>> the money flowing, all their friendliness to linux and open source is
>> tainted with patent attacks behind the curtain. The next time the
>> leadership changes there is no guarantee that this new found
>> friendliness isn't going to change.
>>
>> --
>> Mauro Santos
>>
> 


-- 
Mauro Santos

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Jayesh Badwaik]

On Friday, 19 August 2016 17:05:15 CEST Sebastiaan Lokhorst via arch-general 
wrote:
> So do Red Hat and Google. But does that keep us from using systemd or
> Chromium?
> 
> Please stop this unfounded, tinfoil hat "Micro$oft sucks!!11" whining.
> If there is an actual reason why you shouldn't use a product, please
> say so, but this "don't use it because Microsoft made it" nonsense is
> ridiculous.

The argument is not that they are shit, argument is that they are evil with 
patents and for 
all the talk of friendliness, they are using patents to attack linux and FOSS. 

systemd is GPL and not patented by Red Hat (I won't be surprised if it does 
potentially 
probably violates some patents somewhere on the earth anyway), Chromium is BSD, 
MIT 
etc. Embracing those tools do not leave you vulnerable to patent attacks from 
Google and 
Red Hat. Hence, not using something because of Microsoft is a very good 
argument given 
their track record of using patents nowadays to get even instead of competing 
on 
software.

-- 
Cheers
Jayesh Badwaik


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[gurnaik via arch-general]

On 19/08/16 16:05, Sebastiaan Lokhorst via arch-general wrote:



Please stop this unfounded, tinfoil hat "Micro$oft sucks!!11" whining.
If there is an actual reason why you shouldn't use a product, please say
so, but this "don't use it because Microsoft made it" nonsense is
ridiculous.



They have a proven track record over many years of morally reprehensible 
behaviour to competitors and anything that they perceive as a threat to 
their Windows ecosystem, so the cynicism and the "won't use it because 
it's Microsoft" attitude is completely valid, regardless of how shiny 
the toy is.

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Kwang Moo Yi via arch-general]

On 08/19/2016 05:08 PM, Lee Fuller via arch-general wrote:

Microsoft have set a precedent of unnecessary vile arrogance towards Linux
and the companies you cite here don't. I think that is fundamentally why
most people have responded with scepticism.


For me, defining something *good* and *bad* based on supposed intentions 
are not really convincing. Unless it's a malware in the sense that it 
has some backdoor or something, I see no reason to condemn it, whomever 
wrote the software. To go a bit further, I think we should not treat any 
package special based on authors.


I mean, we don't even know all the people who contributed to the Linux 
Kernel are (well,.. I suppose technically you can, but you know what I 
mean).


Cheers,
Kwang

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Lee Fuller via arch-general]

Microsoft have set a precedent of unnecessary vile arrogance towards Linux
and the companies you cite here don't. I think that is fundamentally why
most people have responded with scepticism.





*Kind Regards,Lee Fuller*

*PGP Fingerprint : *
4ACAEBA4B9EE1B3A075034302D5C3D050E6ED55A

On 19 August 2016 at 16:05, Sebastiaan Lokhorst via arch-general <
arch-general@archlinux.org> wrote:

> 2016-08-19 16:28 GMT+02:00 Mauro Santos via arch-general <
> arch-general@archlinux.org>:
> >
> > Make no mistake, they are after profits and do whatever it takes to keep
> > the money flowing
> >
>
> So do Red Hat and Google. But does that keep us from using systemd or
> Chromium?
>
> Please stop this unfounded, tinfoil hat "Micro$oft sucks!!11" whining.
> If there is an actual reason why you shouldn't use a product, please say
> so, but this "don't use it because Microsoft made it" nonsense is
> ridiculous.
>

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Sebastiaan Lokhorst via arch-general]

2016-08-19 16:28 GMT+02:00 Mauro Santos via arch-general <
arch-general@archlinux.org>:
>
> Make no mistake, they are after profits and do whatever it takes to keep
> the money flowing
>

So do Red Hat and Google. But does that keep us from using systemd or
Chromium?

Please stop this unfounded, tinfoil hat "Micro$oft sucks!!11" whining.
If there is an actual reason why you shouldn't use a product, please say
so, but this "don't use it because Microsoft made it" nonsense is
ridiculous.

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Lee Fuller via arch-general]

Mauro - Could I please quote you verbatim in a post on my personal website?
It' gets very little traffic and so there's nothing really for you to gain,
but I simply couldn't write anything better and feel that your quote
summarises my own view on the news. The address is https://leefuller.io -
please let me know if it's okay and whether you have a website address or
any specific information you'd like me to include. I'd typically link to
the mailman archive page for this thread.

Thanks very much, sorry if I've drawn your attention away from something
more important.

Regards





*Kind Regards,Lee Fuller*

*PGP Fingerprint : *
4ACAEBA4B9EE1B3A075034302D5C3D050E6ED55A

On 19 August 2016 at 15:28, Mauro Santos via arch-general <
arch-general@archlinux.org> wrote:

> On 19-08-2016 14:27, Stephen E. Baker via arch-general wrote:
> > As a PowerShell user, it certainly has it's place, but it's place is
> > pretty niche in the linux world, so +1 for the AUR.
>
> Given that it comes from Microsoft they must have some agenda to
> fulfill, I'd rather not touch this even with a 10 foot pole, just like I
> try to stay away for other MS products as much as I can. The AUR is
> where it should stay, but even then they can spin it as PR fodder just
> like canonical spun snappy coming to Arch Linux.
>
> Make no mistake, they are after profits and do whatever it takes to keep
> the money flowing, all their friendliness to linux and open source is
> tainted with patent attacks behind the curtain. The next time the
> leadership changes there is no guarantee that this new found
> friendliness isn't going to change.
>
> --
> Mauro Santos
>

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Lee Fuller via arch-general]

I couldn't have put it better myself, Mauro.





*Kind Regards,Lee Fuller*

*PGP Fingerprint : *
4ACAEBA4B9EE1B3A075034302D5C3D050E6ED55A

On 19 August 2016 at 15:28, Mauro Santos via arch-general <
arch-general@archlinux.org> wrote:

> On 19-08-2016 14:27, Stephen E. Baker via arch-general wrote:
> > As a PowerShell user, it certainly has it's place, but it's place is
> > pretty niche in the linux world, so +1 for the AUR.
>
> Given that it comes from Microsoft they must have some agenda to
> fulfill, I'd rather not touch this even with a 10 foot pole, just like I
> try to stay away for other MS products as much as I can. The AUR is
> where it should stay, but even then they can spin it as PR fodder just
> like canonical spun snappy coming to Arch Linux.
>
> Make no mistake, they are after profits and do whatever it takes to keep
> the money flowing, all their friendliness to linux and open source is
> tainted with patent attacks behind the curtain. The next time the
> leadership changes there is no guarantee that this new found
> friendliness isn't going to change.
>
> --
> Mauro Santos
>

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Jeroen Mathon via arch-general]

This, just this. is exacly why i also avoid microsoft shitware.


On 19-08-16 16:28, Mauro Santos via arch-general wrote:

On 19-08-2016 14:27, Stephen E. Baker via arch-general wrote:

As a PowerShell user, it certainly has it's place, but it's place is
pretty niche in the linux world, so +1 for the AUR.

Given that it comes from Microsoft they must have some agenda to
fulfill, I'd rather not touch this even with a 10 foot pole, just like I
try to stay away for other MS products as much as I can. The AUR is
where it should stay, but even then they can spin it as PR fodder just
like canonical spun snappy coming to Arch Linux.

Make no mistake, they are after profits and do whatever it takes to keep
the money flowing, all their friendliness to linux and open source is
tainted with patent attacks behind the curtain. The next time the
leadership changes there is no guarantee that this new found
friendliness isn't going to change.

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Mauro Santos via arch-general]

On 19-08-2016 14:27, Stephen E. Baker via arch-general wrote:
> As a PowerShell user, it certainly has it's place, but it's place is
> pretty niche in the linux world, so +1 for the AUR.

Given that it comes from Microsoft they must have some agenda to
fulfill, I'd rather not touch this even with a 10 foot pole, just like I
try to stay away for other MS products as much as I can. The AUR is
where it should stay, but even then they can spin it as PR fodder just
like canonical spun snappy coming to Arch Linux.

Make no mistake, they are after profits and do whatever it takes to keep
the money flowing, all their friendliness to linux and open source is
tainted with patent attacks behind the curtain. The next time the
leadership changes there is no guarantee that this new found
friendliness isn't going to change.

-- 
Mauro Santos

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Jameson via arch-general]

On Thu, Aug 18, 2016, 7:30 PM Hunter Connelly via arch-general <
arch-general@archlinux.org> wrote:
>
>Specifically, if any of you will be using it, if you think it should be in
the main repos, what this might mean for the future, etc.

I plan on trying to use it to manage Windows Servers from my Arch box.

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Stephen E. Baker via arch-general]

On 8/19/2016 6:21 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote:

Hunter Connelly via arch-general  wrote:


Here's an example I found on Reddit in the thread about this on /r/linux.
Both of the following commands find the size and name of the three largest files
in a directory.

Bash:ls -l | sed 's/ \+/,/g' | cut -d',' -f 5,9 | sort -g | tail -3
PowerShell:  ls -file | sort -pr length | select length, name -l 3

If it overlays standardized behavior by non-standard behavior, this would
indeed be a strong afrument against it.

Jörg

By default PowerShell comes preconfigured with aliases that match the 
familiar names of unix programs that approximately describe the 
PowerShell equivalents. Sometimes these aliases are more accurate than 
others, e.g. ls => Get-Items is fairly reasonable, other times the 
aliases are terribly misleading, like curl => Invoke-WebRequest.


PowerShell also interacts poorly with traditional text based unix 
programs (and windows programs for that matter). It is definitely best 
treated like a python shell, interacting with other powershell 
commandlets, modules, and .NET libraries.


As a PowerShell user, it certainly has it's place, but it's place is 
pretty niche in the linux world, so +1 for the AUR.

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Joerg Schilling]

Hunter Connelly via arch-general  wrote:

> Here's an example I found on Reddit in the thread about this on /r/linux.
> Both of the following commands find the size and name of the three largest 
> files
> in a directory.
>
> Bash:ls -l | sed 's/ \+/,/g' | cut -d',' -f 5,9 | sort -g | tail -3
> PowerShell:  ls -file | sort -pr length | select length, name -l 3

If it overlays standardized behavior by non-standard behavior, this would 
indeed be a strong afrument against it.

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:jo...@schily.net(home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
   joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: 
http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.org/private/ 
http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/'

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Joerg Schilling]

Jeroen Mathon via arch-general  wrote:

> A lot of standard scripts will not function correctly.

The same applies if you install "csh" as your shell.

UNIX allows you to shoot you into your foot if you like.

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:jo...@schily.net(home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
   joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: 
http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.org/private/ 
http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/'

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Ismael Bouya]

(Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 11:59:00AM +0200) Jeroen Mathon via arch-general :
> Will that shebang work correctly with powershell?

This is the os's job, not bash's or powershell's, to work correctly with
shebang. From the shell point of view a script is no different to a binary, as
long as it is executable.
If you try to source it, it's another problem of course.
-- 
Ismael


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Jeroen Mathon via arch-general]

Will that shebang work correctly with powershell?


On 19-08-16 11:52, Tinu Weber wrote:

On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 11:39:11 +0200, Jeroen Mathon via arch-general wrote:

Using powershell as your default shell will be a total disaster.

A lot of standard scripts will not function correctly.

Scripts are supposed to have a shebang, so I don't exactly get your
problem.

People are also using fish, whose syntax is quite a bit different, and
they don't seem to have any issues either (apart from the locale part,
but that's something different).

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Tinu Weber]

On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 11:39:11 +0200, Jeroen Mathon via arch-general wrote:
> Using powershell as your default shell will be a total disaster.
>
> A lot of standard scripts will not function correctly.

Scripts are supposed to have a shebang, so I don't exactly get your
problem.

People are also using fish, whose syntax is quite a bit different, and
they don't seem to have any issues either (apart from the locale part,
but that's something different).


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Kwang Moo Yi via arch-general]

On 08/19/2016 07:20 AM, Jeroen Mathon via arch-general wrote:

Shipping PowerShell to linux will be a total disaster.


Why would it be a disaster? One more option for Linux that is totally up 
to the user's freedom to choose. I would personally never use it, but 
it's nice that now I can *choose* to not use it.


and +1 for it the powershell not treating powershell as an exception. 
Let it go through AUR.


Cheers,
Kwang

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Lee Burton]

It's always been my opinion that PowerShell (powerscript?) has been poorly
named -- it's a lackluster /shell/ although things like
psreadline,powershell_ise,etc make it less awful as a shell on windows but
it's great as interpreted (ish -- see DLR/JIT) .NET -- you can compile C#
inside of it or call any .NET library you have laying around. It is a
scripted programming language .. comparing soley to zsh/bash is a bit like
comparing zsh/bash to python/irb with some shortcuts/syntax sugar to make
it more "shell"-like.
Lee

On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 6:49 PM, Eli Schwartz via arch-general <
arch-general@archlinux.org> wrote:

> On 08/18/2016 09:28 PM, Hunter Connelly via arch-general wrote:
> > While I tend to prefer Unix-style shells, there are *some* things that
> > PowerShell does better.
> >
> > Here's an example I found on Reddit in the thread about this on /r/linux.
> > Both of the following commands find the size and name of the three
> largest files
> > in a directory.
> >
> > Bash:ls -l | sed 's/ \+/,/g' | cut -d',' -f 5,9 | sort -g | tail
> -3
> > PowerShell:  ls -file | sort -pr length | select length, name -l 3
> >
> > What seems to be the most noticable difference is that PowerShell, being
> an
> > object-oriented language, pipes objects instead of raw text. I think
> this might
> > make many things easier while writing scripts.
>
> Excellent, let us programmatically parse the contents of `ls`!
>
> What, exactly, is wrong with the bash command:
> find . -maxdepth 1 -printf '%s %p\n'|sort -nr|head -3
>
> I will agree that if your godawful bash command was what you had to
> compare to PowerShell, then PowerShell would be better...
>
> But by all means, pick and choose, then compare bad bash to good
> PowerShell if you feel it makes your point better.
>
> As for objects, if you feel you need them you are probably doing
> something complex enough to justify an actual scripted programming
> language e.g. Python.
> But I doubt you have that great a need for an interactive shell.
>
> --
> Eli Schwartz

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Jeroen Mathon via arch-general]

To be honest.
I think that Bash is way more useful for sys admin work. Shipping
PowerShell to linux will be a total disaster.

On Fri, 19 Aug 2016, 07:17 Christian Hesse,  wrote:

> Hunter Connelly via arch-general  on Thu,
> 2016/08/18 21:28:
> > On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 09:00:33PM -0400, Eli Schwartz via arch-general
> > wrote:
> > > Why would anyone want to use an overly-verbose scripting language like
> > > PowerShell as an interactive shell, **unless it was their only
> option**?
> >
> > While I tend to prefer Unix-style shells, there are *some* things that
> > PowerShell does better.
> >
> > Here's an example I found on Reddit in the thread about this on /r/linux.
> > Both of the following commands find the size and name of the three
> largest
> > files in a directory.
> >
> > Bash:ls -l | sed 's/ \+/,/g' | cut -d',' -f 5,9 | sort -g | tail
> -3
>
> ls -1 --sort=size | head -n3
>
> > PowerShell:  ls -file | sort -pr length | select length, name -l 3
> >
> > What seems to be the most noticable difference is that PowerShell, being
> an
> > object-oriented language, pipes objects instead of raw text. I think this
> > might make many things easier while writing scripts.
> --
> main(a){char*c=/*Schoene Gruesse */"B?IJj;MEH"
> "CX:;",b;for(a/*Best regards my address:*/=0;b=c[a++];)
> putchar(b-1/(/*Chriscc -ox -xc - && ./x
> */b/42*2-3)*42);}
>

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Christian Hesse]

Hunter Connelly via arch-general  on Thu,
2016/08/18 21:28:
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 09:00:33PM -0400, Eli Schwartz via arch-general
> wrote:
> > Why would anyone want to use an overly-verbose scripting language like
> > PowerShell as an interactive shell, **unless it was their only option**?  
> 
> While I tend to prefer Unix-style shells, there are *some* things that
> PowerShell does better.
> 
> Here's an example I found on Reddit in the thread about this on /r/linux.
> Both of the following commands find the size and name of the three largest
> files in a directory.
> 
> Bash:ls -l | sed 's/ \+/,/g' | cut -d',' -f 5,9 | sort -g | tail -3

ls -1 --sort=size | head -n3

> PowerShell:  ls -file | sort -pr length | select length, name -l 3
> 
> What seems to be the most noticable difference is that PowerShell, being an
> object-oriented language, pipes objects instead of raw text. I think this
> might make many things easier while writing scripts.
-- 
main(a){char*c=/*Schoene Gruesse */"B?IJj;MEH"
"CX:;",b;for(a/*Best regards my address:*/=0;b=c[a++];)
putchar(b-1/(/*Chriscc -ox -xc - && ./x*/b/42*2-3)*42);}


pgpNqCq7bbbh8.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [arch-general] Opinions on PowerShell?

[Hunter Connelly via arch-general]

On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 09:00:33PM -0400, Eli Schwartz via arch-general wrote:
> Why would anyone want to use an overly-verbose scripting language like
> PowerShell as an interactive shell, **unless it was their only option**?

While I tend to prefer Unix-style shells, there are *some* things that
PowerShell does better.

Here's an example I found on Reddit in the thread about this on /r/linux.
Both of the following commands find the size and name of the three largest files
in a directory.

Bash:ls -l | sed 's/ \+/,/g' | cut -d',' -f 5,9 | sort -g | tail -3
PowerShell:  ls -file | sort -pr length | select length, name -l 3

What seems to be the most noticable difference is that PowerShell, being an
object-oriented language, pipes objects instead of raw text. I think this might
make many things easier while writing scripts.