ok, but how do i get the only linux command i know? ctrl+r
Works just fine in powershell. Avoid using command prompt and life is already a bit better
The Windows equivalents of the most used Linux commands
11–20 of 72 posts
Re: The Windows equivalents of the most used Linux commands
#12ok, but how do i get the only linux command i know? ctrl+r
F7
Re: The Windows equivalents of the most used Linux commands
#13> Windows: netstat -n -a | findstr "https" (//note the double quotes)
netstat works perfectly fine on linux as well. If you're looking for https connections it's certainly far more efficient than 'lsof'.
also if you use '-n' then you're not going to get service names translated, so that probably should be:
netstat -n -a | find "443"
Re: The Windows equivalents of the most used Linux commands
#14My most used windows command is, and will always be, `ls`. Then I'm reminded that it's not a know file or directory.
It's been nearly 20 years since powershell came out.
And we had cygwin before that. First thing I always installed on a Windows box so I could use bash and all my favorite utilities.
Re: The Windows equivalents of the most used Linux commands
#15> Author's note: From here on, the content is AI-generated Kudos to the author for their honesty in admitting AI use, but this killed my interest in reading this. If you can use AI to generate this list, so can anyone. Why would I want to read AI slop? HN already discourages AI-generated comments. I hope we can extend that to include a prohibition on all AI-generated content. > Don't post generated comments or AI-edi…
Why should you learn anything if you can just use AI to look it up? For fun is one reason.
Re: The Windows equivalents of the most used Linux commands
#16traceroute vs tracert always catches me out.
Re: The Windows equivalents of the most used Linux commands
#17A great non-AI resource on this topic: https://ss64.com/
Re: The Windows equivalents of the most used Linux commands
#18Not bad, but one big criticism, never do a 'kill -9' first, that will stop the program from cleaning up after itself if killed using -9. Use one of these instead: -TERM then wait, if not -INT then wait, if not -HUP then wait, if not -ABRT If you are sure all of these fail, then use -9 (-KILL). But assume the program has a major bug and try and find another program that will do the same task and use that instead.
How often does plain 'kill ' not work, but some other signal other than SIGKILL works?
Usually the process is either working correctly and terminates when asked, or else not working correctly and needs to be KILLed.
Re: The Windows equivalents of the most used Linux commands
#19Not bad, but one big criticism, never do a 'kill -9' first, that will stop the program from cleaning up after itself if killed using -9. Use one of these instead: -TERM then wait, if not -INT then wait, if not -HUP then wait, if not -ABRT If you are sure all of these fail, then use -9 (-KILL). But assume the program has a major bug and try and find another program that will do the same task and use that instead.
Maybe this logic should be built into the "kill" command (or some other standard command). Given that this is the right way, it shouldn't be more tedious than the wrong way!
It could also monitor the target process and inform you immediately when it exits, saving you the trouble of using "ps" to confirm that the target is actually gone.
Re: The Windows equivalents of the most used Linux commands
#20My most used windows command is, and will always be, `ls`. Then I'm reminded that it's not a know file or directory.
[deleted]