To all the people pointing the many inconsistencies of Linux/specific distros, I recommend The Unix Haters' Handbook
this post was submitted on 19 May 2024
156 points (90.2% liked)
Linux
46794 readers
1183 users here now
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Package management is probably the biggest thing a Linux user might need to use the terminal for. The graphical package managers used by default on most desktop environments are far too limited.
KDE's Discover for instance is capable of installing (graphical) desktop applications, uninstalling packages and performing updates. Sure, it supports native packages on the majority of distros through PackageKit, as well as Flatpaks and Snaps, but it can only perform very basic package manager operations. I imagine most users will at some point need to install a package that isn't a graphical desktop application, such as a driver or an optional dependency and they will need to use the terminal for it.
To my knowledge, this is also the state of most other graphical package managers that take the form of "software centers" like Discover. More powerful graphical package managers do exist, usually specific to a specific package manager such as Octopi for Pacman. Few distros ship with them, however. I believe one notable exception is OpenSUSE with YaST. There's also dnfdragora on Fedora, which is pretty basic, but might be good enough for most purposes.
There is also Synaptic which is a graphical front-end for apt, although I would definitely class it as less user friendly than Discover and the like.
I know if I was doing some Linux challenge with no terminal it would have to be my crutch.
Edit: Arch Linux has pamac which I used more frequently than the terminal back then.
My aunt is using Linux without terminal since 2016. Though she at least knows how to open terminal and paste commands when it's necessary (needed a couple of times).
Same here. My Dad has been using Mint for years now, and wouldn't know what to do in the command line. He gets on, does what he needs to do, and it just works for him.
You can use Linux without a terminal, but life is so much easier to just remember few letters (command) and pressing enter instead remembering 200 places where a setting is. You can also always just do sudo pacman --help.
Strong disagree lol but I understand your logic. I am a visual learner and it is a lot easier for me to understand what the structure and options are in a given program when I have a GUI.
To me the terminal feels like a scalpel. It's a precise instrument, but only you need to know exactly what you're slicing into.