Bash, Python and VB stuff. With misc Linux and VIM

{     "color_scheme": "Packages/Tomorrow Color Schemes/Tomorrow-Night-Blue.tmTheme",     "font_face": "Ubuntu Mono",     "font_size": 13,     "ignored_packages":     [         "Vintage"     ],     "theme": "Soda Dark.sublime-theme",     "rulers": [80],     "highlight_line": true,     "line_padding_bottom": 1,     "line_padding_top": 1,     "auto_complete_commit_on_tab": true }

This function formats a list into lined-up columns, and adds a header, suitable for outputting list to the screen.    def PrintFormattedOutput(list_to_print):     col_headers = ['field 1','field 2','field 3','field 4','field 5','field 6']     list_to_print.insert(0,col_headers)     col_widths = [max(len(str(x)) for x in line) + 2 for line in zip(*list_to_print)]     #turn off max length for right-most column to prevent excessive spacing     col_widths[col_widths.index(max(col_widths))] = 0     print '\n'     for i, row in enumerate(list_to_print): print "".join(word.ljust(col_widths[idx]) for idx, word in enumerate(row))     print '\n'

this is a test 123this is anotherplease leave meanother line

hello there this

% means apply to the whole document. The first 's' is substitute, the ^ means at the start of the line, the \s is space, * is 'any number of', and the final \  \ replaces the pattern with 2 spaces.

  grep -ri "create file" . | sort > ~/file_list.txt

ls -R | grep ":$" | sed -e 's/:$//' -e 's/[^-][^\/]*\//--/g' -e 's/^/   /' -e 's/-/|/' Borrowed from: http://www.centerkey.com/tree/

Taken from: http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/programming-9/making-bash-script-wait-after-starting-subshell-739764/

Nice dark Yakuake theme here: http://kde-look.org/content/show.php/Simple+Dark+Yakuake+Theme?content=67667

chmod g+w $( I'm sure this can be done in one line, but I wanted to check the list in between the steps to make sure I didn't mess anything up.

Borrowed from: http://vim.wikia.com/wiki/File_format#Converting_the_current_file

mutt

The increasing popularity of smartphones and slates have driven a radical re-think of OSes. It's down to one thing; touch. When you're not using a mouse and a keyboard for primary input, then a redesign of the OS is needed. This week Steve Jobs commented that while OSX Lion represented OSX and iOS moving closer, it wasn't practical to give desktop machines touch-screen interfaces - it's just not ergonomic. What you've got are OS manufacturers attempting to address two very different segments; the casual/consumer user (slate/smartphone/netbook) and the creator/techie user (desktop machine, keyboard+mouse) Both have very different requirements. For example, Ubuntu Unity would be very suitable as a touch interface. I'm convinced Canonical want to make inroads into this segment (casual user, media consumer), so are using the 11.04 Unity release as a testbed. The trouble is, that their traditional techie userbase are impacted, as they prefer a classic Gnome2/KDE style interface. If I pick up slate and want to check my email, I want to get there as quickly as possible. Look at iOS - one touch on one obvious icon a matter of seconds after switching on the device. Compare to any traditional desktop OS; which involves waiting for boot-up, clicking a menu, finding the entry for 'browser' and clicking it, and then probably having to maximise the window. Much more hassle for what is a simple task. Ah, but if I pick up a laptop and want to update a piece of code on a remote server using ssh/vi. Would I prefer to use an iOS/Android interface (that probably can't do the job to start with) or would I go straight for my Gnome2/KDE interface, knowing I can get to a stable terminal app in a few seconds? *And* I can use a proper keyboard? Finally, I have to mention my washing machine analogy - If I want to put my washing machine to a normal 60 degree cycle and start, do I want to start messing about with swiping my finger across a touchscreen, or just turn a knob?

What's going on with the new Win8 UI? - Large coloured tiles taking up all the screen space? The 'desktop' is dead. That large space that takes up 95% of your screen space when you boot up. The space that people either fill up with a wallpaper, or use as a dumping ground for random shortcuts and files. Totally pointless. MS, Google, and Apple all have the right idea - Use that space for something useful. When the user boots up the device, the next thing they want to do is *do* something. Not sit there admiring their wallpaper. I think it's fantastic, a move back to the principles of good UI design. Affordance and other basic concepts of HCI have finally arrived.

So I'm sitting in a folder, that I know is a soft-link. How do I find the 'real' name of this folder I'm sitting in? $ pwd -P Incidentally, this type of folder is called a symbolic link. If I don't feel like typing; $ cd /usr/bin/myfolder/hello/there/another_level I can create a shortcut like this; $ cd ~ $ ln -s /usr/bin/myfolder/hello/there/another_level shortcut Which means I can get to it like this; $ cd ~/shortcut

Canonical, the company behind the successful linux distro Ubuntu, recently released version 11.04, with the controversial decision to make 'Unity' the default desktop environment instead of the more familiar Gnome. It would be interesting to understand Canonical's business reasoning behind the move to Unity default. I would hope there are business reasons, and this is not just the result of a falling out between Gnome and Shuttleworth. We know that Canonical make their money from offering support and related services off the back of their Ubuntu and derivative offerings. We also know that most of their big customers will be using LTS 10.04 and unlikely to even think about upgrading until the next LTS release. Google and Apple have split their OS offerings to cater for specific customer+device segments, they realised that a 'one size fits all' generic OS doesn't work. People have different needs in an OS. From the 'uber-techie tweak everything' user to the 'I just want something that works' iPad user. Take a look at how Google created ChromeOS specifically for the netbook market, instead of attempting to shoehorn Android in. Canonical have not successfully addressed the slate/casual/smartphone segment. They have Ubuntu One sitting in the background, so they can make some revenue from that, but only when they've made inroads into that segment. Unity has some similarities to the iOS/Android UIs, I can see how it could evolve into a slate OS, and how it might be a suitable OS for the casual netbook user, with some more polishing. I don't think Unity is intended for the more technical or power user, and I honestly think Canonical would be shooting themselves in the foot if they pushed this as the default desktop in the next LTS with no fall-back. Think of the increased cost-of-ownership, training etc. the corporate support customers would incur if this was the case. Thankfully, Canonical have more than one string to their bow; Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu, Edubuntu, and probably Lubuntu (soon, hopefully) - I think defaulting Unity in 11.04 and unleashing it on the general non-LTS population is a cheap and risk-free way of Canonical dipping their toe into the iOS/Android segment in preparation for a push on Ubuntu One.

The finest piece of UI design I've seen in a long time is the App Store on OSX (very similar to the app store on iPhone/iPod) You click on it, and get all the featured software first, then you can go into categories, sort by free/paid/popularity, or you can keyword search. And then, when you've found the software you want installed, seen the screenshot and read the reviews, you click on (guess what) the 'install' button. A little progress bar goes across the icon as it installs. And finally, the icing on the cake, the icon 'flys' down from the app store window and adds itself to the dock. Right there, waiting for you to run it. So no searching your system wondering how to launch the app you just installed. No terminal, no command line, no unpacking, not even any dragging-dropping. I think it works really well, and I don't see why it should be any more complicated than this.