Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

There are real reasons for Linux to replace ifconfig, netstat, etc

utcc.utoronto.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 270 posts

Re: There are real reasons for Linux to replace ifconfig, netstat, etc

#111

Post by VLM »

wruza wrote: post #49

While unrelated to subj or that new systemd wave, I want to state that almost all my sysadm skills are lost. Idk who is responsible for this and if they exists, or is it just time going, but I’m not a power user anymore. Long-term skill investments without a profession are so meaningless – ten years and you stare at the screen with no idea what to do. That was hard time and now it is all for nothing.

If you were a productive unix sysadmin in 2008 you are a productive unix sysadmin in 2018. Its just that Linux is no longer unix-like and you've switched from using, perhaps, Debian install media in '08 to FreeBSD install media in '18. Its not really that big of a problem. Its much easier and more productive to switch to FreeBSD than to switch to ... whatever it is Linux is becoming.

Re: There are real reasons for Linux to replace ifconfig, netstat, etc

#112

Post by Willwhatley »

simias wrote: post #18

I'm trying hard to fight my old muscle memory to use ip instead of ifconfig on Linux. I have a few issues though: * "ip" is useless as a keyword if you're looking for help online. It's extremely frustrating and probably my main issue actually learning how to use the damn thing. * ifconfig's output is simply more readable IMO: https://svkt.org/~simias/up/20180525-113825_ip-vs-ifconfig.p... . It's pretty weird that a b…

NIH doesn't seem to make sense as "next of hop" or "not in here", and search for this initialism is obfuscated by the National Institute of Health.

Mind expanding NIH?

Re: There are real reasons for Linux to replace ifconfig, netstat, etc

#113

Post by phab »

Willwhatley wrote: post #112
simias wrote: post #18

I'm trying hard to fight my old muscle memory to use ip instead of ifconfig on Linux. I have a few issues though: * "ip" is useless as a keyword if you're looking for help online. It's extremely frustrating and probably my main issue actually learning how to use the damn thing. * ifconfig's output is simply more readable IMO: https://svkt.org/~simias/up/20180525-113825_ip-vs-ifconfig.p... . It's pretty weird that a b…

NIH doesn't seem to make sense as "next of hop" or "not in here", and search for this initialism is obfuscated by the National Institute of Health. Mind expanding NIH?

Not Invented Here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_invented_here)

Re: There are real reasons for Linux to replace ifconfig, netstat, etc

#114

Post by da_chicken »

ptx wrote: post #69

So, to summarize, ifconfig has to be replaced because it relies on the /proc filesystem and it doesn't handle aliases? This is easily disproven: ifconfig on FreeBSD doesn't rely on /proc and handles aliases just fine. It sounds a bit like the whole OSS/ALSA discussion – some argued that ALSA was needed to replace OSS because OSS didn't support muxing multiple simultaneous audio streams, but strangely OSS on FreeBSD d…

BSD's ifconfig isn't really related to Linux's ifconfig anymore because BSD has continued development and the Linux fork or version (don't remember which it is anymore) hasn't.

Linux's ifconfig is a part of net-tools (http://net-tools.sourceforge.net/) and the latest release of net-tools, v1.6, was released in April 2001. It's been unmaintained for over 17 years. Some distros began deprecating ifconfig when the Linux 2.2 kernel was released because it lacked features. The Linux ifconfig command doesn't support wireless network devices because they essentially didn't exists when the the command was written. Shit's old.

It's like comparing Seamonkey to Netscape Communicator.

Re: There are real reasons for Linux to replace ifconfig, netstat, etc

#115

Post by [deleted] »

Willwhatley wrote: post #112
simias wrote: post #18

I'm trying hard to fight my old muscle memory to use ip instead of ifconfig on Linux. I have a few issues though: * "ip" is useless as a keyword if you're looking for help online. It's extremely frustrating and probably my main issue actually learning how to use the damn thing. * ifconfig's output is simply more readable IMO: https://svkt.org/~simias/up/20180525-113825_ip-vs-ifconfig.p... . It's pretty weird that a b…

NIH doesn't seem to make sense as "next of hop" or "not in here", and search for this initialism is obfuscated by the National Institute of Health. Mind expanding NIH?

[deleted]

Re: There are real reasons for Linux to replace ifconfig, netstat, etc

#116

Post by h1d »

simias wrote: post #18

I'm trying hard to fight my old muscle memory to use ip instead of ifconfig on Linux. I have a few issues though: * "ip" is useless as a keyword if you're looking for help online. It's extremely frustrating and probably my main issue actually learning how to use the damn thing. * ifconfig's output is simply more readable IMO: https://svkt.org/~simias/up/20180525-113825_ip-vs-ifconfig.p... . It's pretty weird that a b…

I think google is smart enough that you search with "ip command" (maybe plus "linux", it'll get relevant results.

It's better that the command you type often is short, (you can certainly alias ifconfig as "ifg" or anything too).

Re: There are real reasons for Linux to replace ifconfig, netstat, etc

#117

Post by djsumdog »

simias wrote: post #18

I'm trying hard to fight my old muscle memory to use ip instead of ifconfig on Linux. I have a few issues though: * "ip" is useless as a keyword if you're looking for help online. It's extremely frustrating and probably my main issue actually learning how to use the damn thing. * ifconfig's output is simply more readable IMO: https://svkt.org/~simias/up/20180525-113825_ip-vs-ifconfig.p... . It's pretty weird that a b…

I've always thought the same thing. ip addr's output sucks compared to ifconfig.

Looking at it more closely now, ip addr's output doesn't seem that difficult to fix. Remove that random number before the adapter name (what the hell is that anyway? The order in which the adapter appeared? If so, why are not in that order?)

I think that alone would make it so much more readable! Maybe white space between each entry with a flag?

All of the help sections are awful too. I feel like I'm looking at language grammar definition instead of useful usage information.

Re: There are real reasons for Linux to replace ifconfig, netstat, etc

#118

Post by OnMyPhone »

ahartmetz wrote: post #90
simias wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure "terse" is the right adjective. It presents basically the same amount of information as ifconfig (minus the packet counters) and actually adds a few more flags. It's all about the formatting really. Simply adding an empty line between each interface would go a long way. Also starting the line with the interface name instead of the index. Adding more punctuation to delimit the fields (, : etc...) would be…

Huh, does "ip" also support "tc" (traffic control) commands - qdisc is a queueing discipline... tc seems to be the an earlier thing from the people who brought us ip. tc must have the worst command line interface and documentation ever - it is very hard and very frustrating to use, like no other command line interface I've ever seen. I once tried to use tc and gave up after more than a day of trying, that is how bad…

I spent a bit too long on playing with tc a while ago. The best I could get it was to limit each person's download speeds from the one internet connection we had.

I'm with you on tc having the worst interface and documentation that I have seen from a command before. I spent maybe a few days total on it then gave up because I figured if there isn't much documentation on it, it isn't worth figuring out.

Re: There are real reasons for Linux to replace ifconfig, netstat, etc

#119

Post by jcastro »

blackhaz wrote: post #44

When I started learning Linux when it was, I think, 0.99, I appreciated that so many commands where cross-Unix. It was a Unix lookalike. I could watch how something is done on one Unix, type this stuff into my Linux terminal, and get an equivalent result in Linux, and this helped a lot and created a sense of community. Now I see that Linux tears the standards apart, there are more and more obstacles with porting comp…

I think you're over-romantascizing the past here.

Linux dropped the cost of using UNIX down to zero. And it's not like everything was this cross-UNIX Utopia where things worked from system to system consistently and reliably.

We went from a set of highly proprietary and expensive OSes that ran on hardware that a common person had no access to to something that nearly anyone can use.

That's way more important than having to adjust your skill set for new tools over time!

Re: There are real reasons for Linux to replace ifconfig, netstat, etc

#120

Post by h1d »

phab wrote: post #113
Willwhatley wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NIH doesn't seem to make sense as "next of hop" or "not in here", and search for this initialism is obfuscated by the National Institute of Health. Mind expanding NIH?

Not Invented Here ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_invented_here )

Better to avoid vague grammars when not everyone is a native English speaker.
Post reply on HN