Re: [LAU] which lau distro is more commandline friendly?

F. Silvain wrote:
> Hey hey Kare,
> from my point of view - working on the commandline with audio -, the
> specialised audio distributions are mostly specialised in the graphical
> areas. Granted they have the kernels and some additional software very
> handily available. But for commandline work that is such a minor concern,
> compared to the tools, that you really use, that after some research I
> didn't think it worth it. That is why, I turned to Debian and am now
> thinking of switching to archlinux, since they have even better and more
> up-to-date commandline tools, including some audio packages.

I think it must be frustrating for Karen to have to ask
if she doesn't have a command line to start playing with
stuff referred to in answers.

When she mentions keyboard shortcuts, she refers to
ProTools.

With Linux, especially in the world of command line
software, you end up gluing together an assortment of
utilities, Gnu screen configuration, shells aliases, and
probably several of your own scripts.

Then there is getting to know a pager such as 'less'
and a text editor, such as nano or vim.

All as friendly as can be, but with the well-known Unix
learning curve for the terminal environment, shell, command
names, and key bindings.

-- 
Joel Roth
  
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user