Which is why I queried the exact interpretaion of 'not included' in a
I use telnet because its simply less hassle to set up than anything else
inside a secure network.
But its been an 'optional extra' for years.
ssh is the default more or less.
Everything you read in newspapers is absolutely true, except for the
rare story of which you happen to have first-hand knowledge. ? Erwin Knoll
While telnet is not secure it is fine for use at home. The use of telnet
and Samba have some distinct advantages when run from Windows to access
the Pi or another Unix system: * With telnet a normal Windows command prompt becomes a command prompt
on the Unix box just as if it was local. That includes all copy and
paste operations as well as appearance.
* With Samba there is no need to send and receive files. Once a drive
has been mapped, reading from and writing to the Unix box is just like
reading from and writing to a local filesystem such as the C drive. That
works both for Windows Explorer and any command prompt, and any editor
or viewer. It makes the Unix box's file system appear to be local to the
Windows host. With a suitable path I can type things like
That will load and edit a makefile on the Pi. Of course, this works also
for any other type of text file such as source files. One downside of
this specific example is that Wordpad adds CR_LF line endings but they
do not normally affect development tools, they can be removed, and other
Windows editors can be used instead, as can any appropriate Windows
command such as dir, del, ren, type, find etc.
I might be wrong but the last time I looked at FTP and SFTP programs
they had their own custom file tree displays and made it obvious that
files had to be transferred as separate operations to editing them.
That's no different from ssh, though the PuTTY fonts may be a bit
IIRC Samba works best when the master filestore on on the Linux side and
you're pulling files onto the Windows system to work with them. Its a
permissions thing. Windows generally doesn't care about file permissions,
but Linux does, so I'd expect problems a command shell running on Linux
tries to execute a binary (or script) thats on a Windows system and
accessed via Samba. I could be wrong but I think the shell will complain
that the execute flags aren't set.
Might work, might not. Some programs, especially 'make' are quite picky
about formatting characters: it doesn't like spaces where its expecting a
TAB but I haven't tried it with non-native newlines.
Of course. Transferring files is what they do.
Personally, I like to keep at least two copies of any file I've put time
and effort into making, preferably on different boxes and backed up to
offline disks. I generally use either a version control system for that
(cvs or git - git is available for most OSen, dunno about cvs on Windows)
and rsync for file systems, though again I don't know if there's a
Windows version. However thois is the diametric opposit of the way you
want to use Samba, so probably ymdv.
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
IIRC PuTTY treats the clipboard a bit oddly. Is it PuTTY that copies to
the clipboard anything which is just highlighted? And doesn't PuTTY use
line-by-line copying rather than the command prompt's 'truncated
FWICR PuTTY has a tabbed interface for multiple windows which I
personally don't like too much as I work with the keyboard more than the
mouse and prefer to use Alt-Tab to switch between recent windows.
Whether that last point of mine about PuTTY is right or not, using as
many command windows (having telnet sessions in them) as desired makes
working with the remote Unix system just like working locally.
I did one find a command line ssh client for Windows. For me, that was
as good as telnet as it kept one Unix command prompt in each command
Of course, these are just personal preferences. YMMV.
That could well be right. I only ever use the Unix box as the server.
Yes, make requires one or more tabs prior to the command lines but the
ones I have used accept either type of line ending.
Our preferences are maybe not so far apart. I like Samba because it
allows the Pi or other remote box appear to be a local drive and allows
me to see and edit the remote files as if they were local. No
copy-edit-save-copyback process. Just edit-save with any Windows app.
However, I agree about having multiple copies. As I keep almost all data
files on the Unix/Linux server I use rsync to back them up. As rsync
only copies differences it normally completes the backup of hundreds of
megabytes in about 5 mins! I hadn't considered using version control
like git for general files. That's something I'll have a think about.
By the way, Unix seems far more dependable that Windows. For example, I
have an electricity monitor attached to my main desktop PC and it writes
its data to a local file. I set up a Windows job to copy that file each
night to the Unix server and it initially ran reliably but over time it
became unreliable. Windows sometimes runs it and sometimes doesn't. In
fact, it seems to just stop running it sometimes for weeks, with no
explanation in any of the Windows logs. When I run the job manually it
always works. By contrast, I think everything I have ever set up on
Linux just works or you can see in the log what went wrong.
Pass. I last used it a very long time ago: by about 2003 I was no longer
using Windows for anything except a few legacy apps: with everything on
Linux I just didn't need to use PuTTY any more, so I just don't remember
if it did anything odd when copying stuff from its screen. In any case
I'd pretty much expect it to do line-oriented copying since that's the
norm for a *nix console, which the type of display it is implementing and
rectangulat multi-line copies would make an unholy mess if you tried to
do a copy&paste within the console window - something that we do all the
time because its so useful. Similarly, I'd expect a double click to
highlight a whole word.
It didn't have multiple windows, tabbed or not, when I last used it.
But Windows still doesn't support multiple desktops: I'd be lost without
that. My default setup is to have four desktops, switchable via a applet
on the toolbar, and as many windows as I need in each of them. Its really
useful to devote each desktop to a different task, e.g. mail, Firefox,
the Java standard class documentation and the my programming environment.
Same here: at work we typically used Windows PCs as smart terminals,
normally running one of the professional X-terminal packages such as
eXceed and with all development work on the server.
Now I do something similar: since all flavours of *nix are network nodes,
I can sit in front of anything in the house and do stuff on any of the
others (or even on the local box). Hence plugging my RPi onto the 'net
and running it as a headless server was a no-brainer.
I've been using CVS for years, mainly because I first met it at work,
back when it and its forks were about the best there was. I've stayed
with it because its filing system is very simple and any problems can be
fixed by a bit of simple hackery, changing permissions, etc. I'm
currently trying git on one project to see how I get on with it.
All development stuff I do gets version control applied to it, partly as
protection against disk death but mainly as fat-finger protection and
because the fastest way to back out stupidity is the delete the file(s)
and recover the previous version from version control. I also use it for
web pages/images/documents on my house server's Apache but not, oddly
enough, for those published via my ISP's website.
I don't think I've ever tried scheduling tasks on desktop Windows, so
can't comment about that except to say that even Windows Server seems
deficient in that department: the idea of scheduling a weekly task to
kick off an action on a Windows webserver rather than relying on somebody
remembering to login and run it every Friday to seems to be a totally
However, in the Linux/Unix environment I've never had crond fail to run
scheduled jobs. Even if the system has been down or suspended at the
scheduled time atd has always swept up the missed jobs and run them after
the system has come out of suspension or been rebooted. Yes, even this
laptop has its own collection of cron jobs.
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
I found this cron clone made the last few years of regular Windows use
more bearable (the free version was sufficient for my purposes). The way
it's structured makes it relatively easy to write self-modifying cron
jobs, whether that's good or not depends on the user, of course.
Me too. I recently developed a load of utility stuff using cron jobs on
a Debian laptop which I later moved to a Raspbian Pi which now serves as
a kind of data mine, processor and server. Ah, the joy of using such
compatible systems was quite something after the Windows years. :-)
PuTTY attempts to emulate the copy/paste behaviour of typical Unix
desktop environments, rather than the Windows way of doing it.
Probably the programmer was a user of those desktop environments and
was (like me) annoyed by the way it works in Windows. It happens very
often when I work on Windows that I select some text, then paste it
somewhere else only to realize that I forgot to do a "copy" action.
The Unix way requires less mouse action.
It does and it has for some time (W7 or before), it's just a completely
pathetic implementation that doesn't support the taskbar correctly on
all workspaces, and doesn't support moving windows between workspaces.
That's why nobody has bothered telling you it's there!
It isn't! It works extremely well - how do you think those dozens of
applications manage to check for updates and nag you to upgrade on a
regular basis? It's all there in the scheduler.
This is not overly important but on Windows I personally use the mouse
surprisingly little and do a lot with just the keyboard. I find it
usually to be faster.
The Windows (at least XP) GUI is quick to control from the keyboard
without reaching for the mouse. To pick a case in point, I normally have
the command prompts set to 9999 lines so they keep plenty of scrollback
info and then, whether using telnet or not, to copy the whole buffer
into a Notepad window can be done with keystrokes as follows.
Alt-Space, E, S, Enter (copies the whole buffer)
Start, Q, N, Control-V (starts notepad (on my PC) and pastes)
To explain it I had to go and do a real copy but it is something I
normally do without thinking and the whole thing, including starting a
new notepad instance, probably takes a little under a second.
I prefer Unix for most things but do like the Windows XP GUI and find it
more productive, especially using the keyboard for most things and the
mouse only when needed. Going back to the original topic, using telnet
and Samba tends to give me the best of both worlds: a Windows GUI front
end and a real computing environment underneath.
Maybe there is a Unix GUI that's as usable from the keyboard but I
haven't found it yet.
Ok maybe you can care to tell us about it?
Or do you refer to those 3rd party add-ons that have been available for
some time, often as give-away with videocard support software?
Well that is not the same thing. In Windows Server 2003 and before, it
was possible to start a GUI program from the scheduler, and when its
time to run came by and the console was logged on, the program would
just open on the console and do its thing (visible). That could be
surprising when you were working on the console at that time.
In later versions this no longer works and those programs usually refuse
to run from the scheduler. You will need to adapt them so they don't
use a GUI or remain in the toolbar. Just like those update checkers do.
Not my typical usage. What I often want to do is copy part of a previous
command that is still on the screen (e.g. a long filename that has
been part of a previous command and that I need again in a new command)
and immediately paste it back into the same window, or copy an entire
command to paste it into another window that connects to another system.
For that, the "just select to copy" and "just click to paste" is much
more convenient than the windows way.
??? you probably need to look closer
most Linux GUI's i have seen have plenty of options for keyboard short-
cuts, I mainly use XFCE & LDXE both of which have excellent keyboard
short cut support & have not succumbed to the current trend to believe
everything is a tablet.
if you really want to ditch the mouse you could try rat-poison :-)
The degree of civilization in a society can be judged by entering its
A minor point but Windows only requires one extra click! (The right
click to copy.) I can see the Unix way is more convenient but it could
be argued that it is possible to overstate the case.... ;-)
3 extra clicks! The right-click to open the context menu to select
copy from, then the click on copy, then a right-click at the destination
to again open the context menu, and finally a click to paste it
(which is required in Unix as well, there it usually is a middle click).
On 16 Apr 2015 12:08:51 GMT, Rob declaimed the
Ever try enabling Quick Edit mode then? No context menu -- highlight
text, right click to copy; move cursor to destination, right click to
Wulfraed Dennis Lee Bieber AF6VN
Now you are talking about a CMD window. I am talking about generic
windows with text pane, where it works as I described. In case of the
command window without quick edit mode it is even worse, because there
you have to first right-click and select "mark" before you can even
highlight the text.
No, it's built in and has been since XP. That came with a Power Toy to
enable it, but on W7 and W8, you have to bugger about a bit. Google for
Virtual Desktops on Windows to find out how. Prepared to be disappointed