I know that there is a .gitconfig file, but I prefer /usr/local/bin to create bash scripts.

It's universally agreed upon that this is where scripts should go (maybe not universally, but point being). If I'm looking for scripts on another person's computer, I would go there and cat those files. So yes, it does matter where you put things.

I tend to use scripts for more complex items, and don't like to use aliasing on basic built-in commands. I used to have a complex emacs init file, and seeing an emacs wizard buckle while using it was quite impressive.

If I really want to alias the standard git commit, I'd just write a bash file that looks like this (with variants):

Stuff like that doesn't save me any time, so I don't really bother. This doesn't mean that I don't have complicated build and deploy scripts, but I tend to prefer a vanilla environment.

I found Ubuntu to be an extremely frustrating and difficult distro to use. Arch isn't for everyone, I know.

I first tried Ubuntu back in the days when they were running Amazon ads in your local search results. Obviously that put a bad taste in my mouth and I didn't care one iota if I could change those settings.

There are too many games and other insane silly programs that would take me 2 weeksto remove. I used to be able to build a clean Arch system in 30 minutes.

What version of python (or any program) am I getting? It may or may not be the latest stable release. Fedora and Arch defaults to the latest version of anything. It's a good starting point to know what I'm getting, and to know what I need to do to get something else.

And the nice thing about Arch: amazing documentation! You can shoot yourself in the foot, but it nearly never happens if you read the docs. I was using it during the legendary /usr file move, and it was more smooth and easy than some Fedora updates of late.

Making my laptop dual boot with Linux was a bit of a faff. It has a very aggressive UEFI, which prefers Windows. I just about overcame those issues, but I still need to hold f12 at boot to bring up the Grub menu.

Various bits give a really slow boot, such as Bluetooth. I've disabled most of them, but some seem too deeply embedded to solve.

I may try Arch - I used Debian stable, which was brilliant on my desktop.

You might look into virtual machines instead of dual booting

Assuming you checked your boot order, I think there is a way to switch BIOS to legacy mode.

For some reason, legacy mode doesn't work at all. It was one of the first things I tried.

well they're git aliases, not bash aliases, but no, it doesn't really matter. i mean, you won't be polluting your global aliases with git only ones, and you can list all your git aliases easily, but it's more like, if there's no cost to it you may as well use your tools the right way. there may be other reasons too i'm not aware of.

as much as i value simplicity, my broader point was more that you shouldn't view ergonomic customizations as a bad thing -- you should take advantage of them. the git autocomplete thing i linked is wonderful, eg.

daveT, you can install Anaconda, which will give you the up to date version of Python plus a few more things with relative ease. I have only used Ubuntu so far. But yes, making sure you have Python 3.X was a pain for me, and pip3 as well.

Does anyone here use redux-forms?

I have finally become proficient with it (we have the most complicated forms you can imagine) and I feel like I've learned an entire framework.

Being proficient meaning I have a handle on what I think are the major conventions and opinions and all the stuff you might try to do that will not work until you do it the redux-form way.

Fedora is Python3-based and used Anaconda to install itself. What you say is just stuff I don't want to think about.

And that's the rub I had with Ubuntu. It would take me forever to install what I want and remove the 10G of trash I don't want. I really hate configuring my system, which is why I left Windows.

I think you're probably picking the wrong install target. You can start with as bare of an ubuntu install as you like and add what you want. That's what I usually do.

So these are all different?

https://www.ubuntu.com/download/ubuntu-flavours

I'd guess you use Lubuntu? I used LXDE for many years then finally settled on KDE.

No, I mean, when you do an install, you have a choice of what "kind" of install to do. During the install you'll see a screen like:



It may preselect an option for you, I don't remember. Most people choose something like "desktop" or whatever, you but can choose to just install the core and install whatever minimal stuff you want on top of that.

There's also the server installer - the ISO file of 17.10 is only 566MB, tough to compress 10G of crap in there

Personally I use Kubuntu for it's excellent KDE, and have for many years - it didn't come with a load of crap either as far as I noticed and I don't recall ever having trouble installing python or python3, not that I use them much but I guess I needed them at some point.

Ubuntu is not a rolling release though, so Arch may well be preferable for that reason alone.

I love arch because I'm a huge nerd/bandwagon follower and minimal setups give me a stiffy. No sarcasm, I regularly browse r/unixporn.

Plus the documentation is the GOAT.

Doubleplus if you want to really learn linux, there's no better way than spending the time to build an arch setup from scratch, run into all the mistakes you make, and solve them yourself via the excellent documentation.

My worst Linux moment was grabbing all the files off a burned down OS and backing them up on a USB.

You can learn a bit by going through the motions of building an Arch OS, but as it's only done once and you'll likely forget what fstab does anyways, I'm not sure.

Anyone here have good resources in redux reducers, spread syntax, and making good immutable changes. Other than reading through the source code and docs (which I plan to do over the weekend).

It's become apparent that our reducers are having side effects (such as persisting data structures unintentionally) and I'm gonna learn the nuts and bolts of this.

These days, probably. When I started, if you didn't know how fstab worked, you more or less couldn't mount a disk. You had to know how everything worked (and most of it didn't)

There was a version of Slackware where the disk partitioner was broken. To get an install working, you had to break out of the install, partition by hand, then get back into the install. Or, partition the disk before installing (which was easier but required you to have 2 boot disks on hand). So I used to carry a bare minimum redhat install disk, and a full slackware disk.

It actually might have been the opposite, that RH was broken and SW wasn't, I am not sure now. This would have been 20 years ago.

Anyway, it was not common at that time for someone to have a linux machine they installed themselves that they didn't know a lot about. Redhat started to change that in the late 90s, with installs that were point and click and fairly simplified.

Getting X-windows to work used to be incredibly difficult, and getting it to work *well* was an arcane science. To get hardware acceleration usually involved compiling and installing 3rd party drivers, with little or no documentation. But without that you couldn't watch, say, full screen video.

Lol FJ Cruiser forums has some serious captchas.

When I was using Arch a few years back, the video drivers was a similar situation. Just go to nvidia and hope for the best...

Fedora was a PITA up until a few versions ago as well. When I first started with it, I had to chase down the closed-source version of flash (to watch youtube), and still have to chase down closed source java and other drivers. I haven't even installed Chrome or VLC in this computer yet. The open source drivers work okay, but the real stuff works a lot better. DNF also helps with installing .ram files and tracking the multiple repos. I'm not really sure if pacman or DNF + RAM is a better thing quite yet.

It's funny, because Fedora's FLOSS by default isn't a moral / ethics thing. Red Hat is based in the US so much more vulnerable to being sued than Ubuntu. It happens that it is morally in line with many hard-core FLOSS types, but the EFF doesn't prescribe Fedora because it doesn't explicitly take a stand on this issue.

these guys have some great redux stuff imo. but its angular2 and typescript, thought you used something different.

http://blog.rangle.io/tag/redux/

https://rangle-io.gitbooks.io/react-..._reducers.html

https://angular-2-training-book.rang...anagement.html

https://www.gitbook.com/book/rangle-...ourse2/details

this is my understanding:

a reducer should just be changing something in the state of an app. or really it mutates the state and creates a new state. not really sure how it could be having side effects as it should not be dispatching actions or anything. nor should it be running a new function.

Upon rereading, I wrote that wrong, reducer should NOT mutate state. It creates a new state.

DaveT - Arch Linux few years ago was certainly not a similar situation with Linux video drivers as X11 in 1997. It's not close lol.

I'd imagine the situation was far worse.

There was actually a legitimate risk you could smoke your expensive CRT if you transcribed a long sequence of arcane numbers (modelines) slightly wrong, IIRC