This is 2023 article. As with most “modern tools” half of them probably already have some newer, shinier and more trendy replacements
There's a lot of tools here. Half still leaves plenty of value.
Modern Linux tools
21–30 of 219 posts
Re: Modern Linux tools
#22These may be objectively superior (I haven't tested), but I have come to realize (like so many others) that if you ever change your OS installation, set up VMs, or SSH anywhere, preferring these is just an uphill battle that never ends. I don't want to have to set these up in every new environment I operate in, or even use a mix of these on my personal computer and the traditional ones elsewhere. Learn the classic to…
Some people spend the vast majority of their time on their own machine. The gains of convenience can be worth it. And they know enough of the classic tools that it's sufficient in the rare cases when working on another server.
Not everybody is a sysadmin manually logging into lots of independent, heterogeneous servers throughout the day.
Re: Modern Linux tools
#23These may be objectively superior (I haven't tested), but I have come to realize (like so many others) that if you ever change your OS installation, set up VMs, or SSH anywhere, preferring these is just an uphill battle that never ends. I don't want to have to set these up in every new environment I operate in, or even use a mix of these on my personal computer and the traditional ones elsewhere. Learn the classic to…
> that if you ever change your OS installation
apt-get/pacman/dnf/brew install
You'll need install those and other tools (your favorite browser, you favorite text editor, etc) anyway if you're changing your OS.
> or SSH anywhere
When you connect through SSH you don't have GUI and that's not a reason for avoiding using GUI tools, for example.
> even use a mix of these on my personal computer and the traditional ones elsewhere
I can't see the problem, really. I use some of those tools and they are convenient, but it doesn't matter that I can't work without that. For example, bat: it doesn't replace cat, it only outputs data with syntax highlight, makes my life easier but if I don't have it, ok.
Re: Modern Linux tools
#24i wish there was an additional column in the table, that says "what problem does it solve". oh, and 'it's written in rust' does not count.
Many of the entries do include this detail — e.g. "with syntax highlighting", "ncurses interface", and "more intuitive". I agree that "written in rust", "modern", and "better" aren't very useful!
Re: Modern Linux tools
#25I basically live in the terminal. However, every single one of these tools offers a solution to a problem that I don't have; aren't installed on my system; and mysteriously have many tens of thousands of github stars. I genuinely don't know what is going on here.
The core Unix toolset is so good, that you can easily get by with it. Many of these tools are better, but still not necessary, and they certainly aren't widely available by default.
Re: Modern Linux tools
#26duf is pretty good for drive space, has some nice colours and graphs. But its also not as useful for feeding into other tools.
btop has been pretty good for watching a machine to get an overview of everything going on, the latest version has cleaned up how the lazy CPU process listing works.
zoxide is good for cding around the system to the same places. It remembers directories so you avoid typing full paths.
Re: Modern Linux tools
#27Modern doesn't always mean better. A better replacement for mplayer was mpv, and in some cases mplayer was faster than mpv (think about legacy machines). - bat it's a useless cat. Cat concatenates files. ANSI colour breaks that. - alias ls='ls -Fh' , problem solved. Now you have * for executables, / for directories and so on. - ncdu it's fine, perfect for what it does - iomenu it's much faster than fzf and it almost…
> bat it's a useless cat. Cat concatenates files. ANSI colour breaks that.
It's useless as a cat replacement, I agree. The article really shouldn't call it that, although the program's GitHub page does self-describe it as "a cat clone". It's more of a syntax highlighter combined with a git diff viewer (I do have an issue with that; it should be two separate programs, not one).
Re: Modern Linux tools
#28Modern doesn't always mean better. A better replacement for mplayer was mpv, and in some cases mplayer was faster than mpv (think about legacy machines). - bat it's a useless cat. Cat concatenates files. ANSI colour breaks that. - alias ls='ls -Fh' , problem solved. Now you have * for executables, / for directories and so on. - ncdu it's fine, perfect for what it does - iomenu it's much faster than fzf and it almost…
> bat it's a useless cat
I can't see bat as a "useless cat" or a replacement for cat except for reading source code in the terminal. It's more a like a less with syntax highlight or a read-only vim.
Re: Modern Linux tools
#29the second item is exa modern replacement for ls/tree, not maintained "not maintained" doesn't smell "modern" to me...
That's the Lindy effect: old tools like ls last because they've already lasted, while modern ones often don’t stick around long enough to.
the future life expectancy is proportional to its current age
Re: Modern Linux tools
#30I’m on a Mac, and some of the default tooling feels dated: GNU coreutils and friends are often stuck around mid-2000s versions. Rather than replace or fight against the system tools, I supplement them with a few extras. Honestly, most are marginal upgrades over what macOS ships with, except for fzf, which is a huge productivity boost. Fuzzy-finding through my shell history or using interactive autocompletion makes a noticeable difference day to day.