Shells

What shell does /prog/ use?
I've only used bash, but I want to explore my options. So, which shell do you use, and, if you feel so inclined, why?

Kernel is the thing which bridges between hardware and software basically.
You can think of a Window Manager as linux equivalent to explorer.exe . It is GUI interface to folders and files.
OS stands for Operation System. It is the collection of kernel and software which makes things work
Shell is a command-line based interface for executing kernel commands

>>80
I almost don't believe this is a real question, but....

The kernel manages the hardware and provides system calls to programs. Graphics in *nix are conventionally provided by an X server. The shell is an interface through which users can interactively operate the system. Windows ships with both a graphical shell, explorer.exe (which provides the taskbar and various other things—it's not just the Windows Explorer file manager), and a command-line shell, which can be accessed through cmd.exe. *nix systems ship with some command line shell, often bash, and some graphical shell that runs on top of X11. The OS is some combination of the above, along with basic system administration programs.

The X server provides facilities for programmatically creating and drawing to windows, but none for user management of those. A window manager takes all the windows under its wing, providing title bars, an easy way to resize and move windows, and whatever else it wants.

>>78
I'm thinking of a framebuffer-based character console, not an X terminal emulator.

Which is potentially even worse, if you use special resolutions.
But very rarely people do, unfortunately.

Yes. Hate the sinner, not the temptress.
I'm a OFM user (and at this rate, developer; fucking Midnight Commander sucks and the other ones on GNU/Linux are even worse), and I'm worried because I'm not getting it right in my OFMs. Only Norton Commander, FAR Manager and very few others did it right: a command line which you can use at the same time you browse panels, run commands and see their results (as panels don't have to cover all of the screen; they can very well cover just the upper half).
Yeah. You've got me wanting to write an OFM now.

Can you make a custom explorer.exe?

>>84
You can set the default window manager which starts up in a registry setting. You can create a custom "explorer.exe" by using the Win32 API, specifically the GDI graphics routines.

>>84
Yeah, that's what stuff like Litestep is.

>>78
I'm thinking of a framebuffer-based character console, not an X terminal emulator.
fixed number of columns FTL.  Fuck off, already.  People want flexibility in their displays, and how do you multitask?  Virtual terminals?  screen?  DIAF.

I don't give a shit about the VT100, and you shouldn't either. 99.999999999999999999999999999999% of the people running GNU/Linux have a keyboard which has, at least, something resembling a PC keyboard with no less than 100 keys, supports key down and up scancodes, and can display (or at the very worst gracefully ignore) colour attributes. What we need is a console protocol (not X, not plain text with escape shit) for console applications which can run locally or over a remote shell.
What about remoting from a system without support for this?  A terminfo wrapper?  On the client, on the server?

What is so bad about the current situation anyway?  It works, and rarely do you have to write the escape sequences by hand, that's what terminfo and shit is for.

Sure, catting some junk and having your terminal messed up sucks, but one reset later and you're back to hacking.

>>88
0/10

>>89
It's not like you really NEED terminal manipulation shit for anything other than entertainment, so why is there such a need (1 person) for Windows shit here?

>>87
I like fast and rock-solid display better than flexibility. How do I multitask? Switching between different full-screen applications, of course. I paid for the whole screen, so I don't see why I wouldn't want to use all of it at once.

>>88
What about remoting from a system without support for this?
No remoting, period. Just like you can't remote X if you don't have X.

What is so bad about the current situation anyway?
I already posted what. ^]44u;~37m];, half of the keys won't work, Escape mapped horribly so that you cannot use it as an individual key (without some sort of timeout and making your program ugly), slow operation for things like curses, a gazillion different terminals, every terminfo broken in funny and unexpected ways, subtle incompatibilities between every major Linux distro and version terminal key codes to fuck you all over (this breaks remoting BTW), no real support for scancodes, shitty support for character attributes.

>>90
It's not like you really NEED terminal manipulation shit for anything other than entertainment, so why is there such a need (1 person) for Windows shit here?
Yes, the best OFM ever is pure entertainment; every time I run FAR it just cracks me. But nevermind it's the best and most efficient (fastest human oepration) file manager ever; it's Windows shit.

>>91
Yes, the best OFM ever is pure entertainment; every time I run FAR it just cracks me. But nevermind it's the best and most efficient (fastest human oepration) file manager ever; it's Windows shit.

I do believe he was mocking the entire notion of cramming such an app into the terminal.

The command line is my file manager.

>>93
Mine too, now we are friends.

http://v6shell.org/

I LOVE MIDNIGHT COMMANDER

>>96
under the moon
sussman to issho~

>>92
It naturally fits a terminal, firstly because the OFM is an extension to the command line shell; secondly because it's most efficiently implemented with a character interface free of faggot shit such as icons or toolbars.

>>93
So is mine, but I enhance it with an OFM which allows me to keep two current directories, issue the most common commands faster, automatically browse directories I'm in in various modes, and automatically insert filenames in what's a more visual and sophisticated version of tab completion (just not with tab).

>>96
I like it, but it's really a toy OFM when compared to the big guys such as FAR Manager; it's not even average for a non-GUI OFM. How would I love (and pay for) a GNU/Linux OFM that's just 75% as good and capable as FAR, supports Alt completion and the rest of the keys can all be customized.

>>98
What's Alt completion?

>>99
broken tab completion for people with broken tab keys.

>>98
How would I love (and pay for) a GNU/Linux OFM
What do you mean "pay for"? GNU stuff is free (as in "not (exactly) overpeiced").

>>101
i think by "GNU/Linux" he means "runs on GNU/Linux", not "written by GNAAfags".

>>100
What is it for real?

>>103
What is love?  Baby don't hurt me, don't hurt me, no more.

This thread has reached 104 posts. You cannot post in this thread anymore.

>>105
why not?

>>106
shii sez

>>107
That's what shii said.

>>108
That's it, everybody pack up your things and go home, people. This thread is over.

>>109
But I never found out what Alt completion really is.

>>110
It is for entering characters that arent; on your keyboard without opening up Character Maps

>>111
entering characters that aren't shouldn't be possible at all, since they don't exist. also, the second clause in your post is incomplete (doesn't contain a verb).

>>112
Your English parser sucks. Also, using `accents´ in place of the apostrophe is  ̔strongly discouraged ̕.

>>113
>>112 doesn't contain any accents.

>>113
is  ̔strongly discouraged ̕.
Spacing, please!