On a native Linux system there are typically two separate copy buffers - one is your classic ctrl+c (typically ctrl+shift+c in a terminal) whilst the other is really smart and I miss it like crazy on other systems: Whenever you highlight some text it is automatically copied to a buffer so your copy paste is as simple as highlighting what you want and then middle-click where you want it pasted (or various other options for pasting - the simplest being both mouse buttons together if you don't have a middle one). PuTTY comes with really odd defaults for copy pasting in my opinion. What you're describing with bash is definitely down to the terminal emulator and not bash itself. And ctrl+c is for cancelling the current operation so it had better not be bound to copy in my terminal. There is just no decent option available.Įnter to copy sounds much more like my experience of copying in Windows. I've changed the fonts many times but all the windows fonts look horrible to me. Maybe this is a move in the right direction. The window was seen as just for legacy DOS type programs. This is something that I don't believe Windows has ever done properly. I know this is conflated by the monolithic commands that developers appear to like developing now, where the a single tool does everything, and that has it's place for some types of applications, but basic OS commands should IMHO be independent of the terminal access.
It fits in with the Unix ethos, do one thing, and do it well. So the terminal emulator handles driving the screen, handling keys and doing the copy/paste, and the shell runs commands. This allows you to separate the terminal emulation from the command processor.
You use something like Putty or an xterm to get access to the system, and you then run a shell such as bash or ksh through that access to run commands. I know I'm an old foagy, but this type of confusion between components on systems is part of the root of many of the problems with modern CLIs. This allows you to keep the same terminal emulation while changing the shell you want to use. The difference is that shells process commands, and the terminal emulation handles the presentation. You are aware that bash (at least on Linux) is a shell not a terminal emulator.
0 kommentar(er)
