What's he using in the video to give the almost path bar effect for the prompt in terminal?
It's actually the Solarized Dark, to be more specific. :)
91–100 of 112 posts
What's he using in the video to give the almost path bar effect for the prompt in terminal?
It's actually the Solarized Dark, to be more specific. :)
Something like this would be awesome for vagrant!
https://github.com/fitztrev/shuttle/blob/master/Shuttle/shut...
Basically just do `vagrant ssh-config box_name_here` to get the port and identity file that you need to specify in the SSH command.
For me you can't beat the combination of Alfred [0] and the SSH workflow [1]. [0] http://alfredapp.com [1] https://github.com/isometry/alfredworkflows/tree/master/net....
Or (in Alfred) just type: >ssh [host] If you keep your ~/.ssh/config up to date and can remember your host names, I find it quicker to do that than bothering with the workflow.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or (in Alfred) just type: >ssh [host] If you keep your ~/.ssh/config up to date and can remember your host names, I find it quicker to do that than bothering with the workflow.
I don’t think alfred does that by default, does it? Even with the powerpack.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This looks pretty sweet. Seems like it'd work well with EC2 for transparently getting you into the private hostnames without having to open security groups and use something like FoxyProxy. Anyone used it for this?
I haven't looked at it all, but it sounds like you're wanting something like the functionality that SSH's "ProxyCommand"? As an example, we lockdown our servers so that they are only accessible via SSH from a few hosts. I got tired of SSH'ing into server A just to SSH into server B, so I set up my ~/.ssh/config file so that when I "ssh serverB", it uses the ProxyCommand functionality to basically do that for me. Here…
ProxyCommand looks pretty cool though, wasn't aware of it - thanks!
I have two-byte aliases for ssh to all of the hosts I use commonly, doesn't everyone? (It even reattaches my remote screen session.) Why would I want to touch the mouse?
This was my first thought too, but then I considered the case where I'm already using the mouse and want to open a terminal and ssh to an app server. With this it would be two clicks, where without out it requires a move to the keyboard, a hotkey, and two keystrokes. However, moving to the keyboard is necessary after the SSH anyway, so that step doesn't really count against the latter. Is it for me? I'll try it, but…
Command-n
zz enter
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure that is completely fair. He was just making the point that using only your keyboard is much faster and there are already built in tools for doing that. He may have just been asking why someone would want to use a mouse over a keyboard for this type of thing.
And the parent's point is that "why doesn't everybody use all keyboard shortcuts all the time" is a HN refrain that is tired and smug, and yet still the top-voted comment here.
Your hands are going to the keyboard.
We're discussing whether or not it's worth screwing around with the mouse beforehand.
I have two-byte aliases for ssh to all of the hosts I use commonly, doesn't everyone? (It even reattaches my remote screen session.) Why would I want to touch the mouse?