Learning Unix for Mac OS X Panther 284
Learning Unix for Mac OS X Panther | |
author | Dave Taylor and Brian Jepson |
pages | 168 |
publisher | O'Reilly Publishing |
rating | 8 |
reviewer | Kevin Spencer |
ISBN | 0596006179 |
summary | Learning Unix for Mac OS X Panther is a good tool for those who are generally comfortable with the original Mac OS or Mac OS X, but not the Unix command line. Most of the content would not interest the traditional programmer, Linux, BSD, or other UNIX jockey, however. The Finder can't do it all, and it's a good idea to realize that today's Mac OS has more ways to force it to work than its original version. This 3rd edition of the book has a better audience focus than previous editions. |
This book focuses on those of us in the Mac OS professional world who have become Unix system admins by default with the introduction of OS X, and could stand to have a handy UNIX reference nearby, particularly if the Finder freezes in Apple's latest version of their BSD/OpenStep blend of a UNIX operating system.
As the authors explain in the book, the best justification for understanding and using the UNIX components present is Mac OS X is the same as in any other UNIX-family operating system: power and control. The Finder (Mac OS X's graphical desktop manager) can't do everything, so this book provides information to help power users and technicians resolve issues, install software, or create an optimized experience, all through the Terminal.
Chapters 1 and 2 provide a very helpful tutorial on the Mac OS X Terminal application, from showing the benefits of customizing the Terminal, the concept of shells, UNIX command syntax, and other obscure but useful settings that strengthen the power of the application when accessing the BSD innards of Mac OS X. Arguably, these two chapters are the strongest guide on Mac OS X's Terminal application (as it relates to its UNIX roots) that I have seen in any Mac OS X book to date.
Chapters 3 and 4 handle understanding of the UNIX filesystem, administration and superuser access, privileges, handling external volumes, file and directory names and the like. Mac OS X, while a BSD at heart, doesn't map out everything in a traditional UNIX-style directory format--at least, not from the Finder's view. Through the Terminal, a user can see the underlying, otherwise-hidden UNIX directories. The authors go through some basic but very helpful situations such as changing file and owner permissions, which can be changed from the Finder with greater ease in Panther, but not with the same finesse as done from a command line.
The file management chapter moves readers through the classic commands for moving, editing, and copying files from the command line, which can be very helpful for administrators of Mac OS X systems who must attempt repairs by SSH, for instance, and don't have access to the usual graphical elements that generally make Mac OS usage so easy. The authors don't pick sides in the vi vs. pico debate, and just offer the basic instructions on how to use either for your editing.
The book continues with the same level of complexity that local system admins or power users require in issues such as printing via CUPS, handling processes that the Finder doesn't show, using the X11 application, using Fink (a Debian-style installation application) installing OpenOffice and GIMP, using FTP and secure shell, using Pine and Lynx, and more.
For a book of just 168 pages, the authors pack quite a bit on making a Mac OS X system work from its Terminal roots. New Mac OS X system administrators will find this book most useful, particularly if their UNIX experience is lacking or radically different from what Mac OS X presents. Experienced *NIX users who bought a new Mac may find the book a good intermediary to demonstrate how Mac OS X Panther differs from the *NIX boxen they've used in the past.
You can purchase Learning Unix for Mac OS X Panther from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.
The Finder (Score:5, Funny)
"Yes it can."
-Steve Jobs
Re:The Finder (Score:5, Informative)
and neither can terminal.app! lord, it's the worst terminal program i've ever used. there are, however, some good replacements.
Re:The Finder (Score:5, Informative)
This is unnecissarily hyperbolic. Apple's Terminal.app is fairly no-frills, but it still has some nice features, such as transforming a folder or file dropped from the Finder (or any title bar avatar) into a pathname. You can drag and copy and paste just like any other app. You can change fonts (even to non-monospace fonts). It'll emulate a number of terminals (e.g. VT-100, xterm-color, etc.) You can customize the title bar display. Set the transparency of the window itself (eye-candy). It has an unlimited scrollback buffer. It'll handle multibyte scripts (e.g. Kanji or Chinese), as well as handle a number of character encodings. It has customizable command keys.
It's leaps and bounds beyond cmd.exe. But perhaps you've had the good fortune never to have encountered that.
Re:The Finder (Score:2)
I actually like it better than the company app, Reflections. (Though admittedly Reflections has its uses.) Especially once you create customized little "terminalettes" to do things like launch kword or run scripts via double-click.
-WS
Apple already provides an excellent tool (Score:3, Informative)
If you don't know what a command does, type "man [command]" (without the quotes, of course).
Re:Apple already provides an excellent tool (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Apple already provides an excellent tool (Score:3, Insightful)
One could use the apropos command for a start.
Re:Apple already provides an excellent tool (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Apple already provides an excellent tool (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Apple already provides an excellent tool (Score:3, Informative)
ManOpen [versiontracker.com]
Re:Apple already provides an excellent tool (Score:5, Funny)
man finger
man touch
man slurp
man unzip
I find it best to unzip first.
Re:Apple already provides an excellent tool (Score:2)
man pages? Not for all commands. (Score:3, Informative)
The real problem comes from all of those commands that apple has so kindly added and didn't bother to create man pages for. Stuff like 'disktool' and 'scselect'. Disktool gives some usage info when you call it...scselect, well...
And how many others are there out there that people hav
Re:+5 insightful (Score:2, Insightful)
very useful (Score:2, Informative)
Re:very useful (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:very useful (Score:5, Informative)
Uh, sure it does. Go to File->New Project then scroll down and choose Standard Tool. Boom, a project is all set up for you to build a basic C-based command-line tool. You can also choose C++ Tool, CoreFoundation Tool, CoreServices Tool, or Foundation Tool for different libraries and programming languages.
Re:very useful (Score:2)
Of course, anyone who thinks it's a problem for a C programmer to be able to easily create a command line tool seems like a bit of a troll to me; how many people
Re:very useful (Score:2, Insightful)
Let me guess... you've never fiddled around with some setting or file you probably shouldn't have, and wound up paying for it? Doubtful...
Renaissance people DO exist (Score:5, Insightful)
There's a deeper cultural thing going on here. On this site it's not uncommon to see programming-types bash (pardon the pun) users of more graphically-oriented tools (like Flash) with incredible zeal. It's as if there's some sort of Berlin Wall between creative and techinical people, and any attempt to bridge the two is doomed to failure or must be opposed.
This is nonsense.
This seperation of arts & humanities from the sciences is a relatively recent phenomonon. It's when people work with both sides of their brains that beautiful things really start to happen. Look at Leonardo Da Vinci if you want the best example. Look at the power of tools like Flash when you get people working on it to use its more powerful features like XML parsing with ActionScript, remoting, video etc. Look at musicians who can manipulate their creations electronically. Look at the animators who produce beautiful work on the big screen like Finding Nemo, Babylon 5 etc.
A lot of creative Mac people will benefit from having a deeper understanding of the way their command-line works, and if they're approaching it from a different angle than traditional Unix fans then so what? Isn't a fresh persective a good thing? Likewise I think that a lot of Unix fans could do well to visit more art galleries and explore their creative side a bit more. It may make better programmers out of them.
For the record, I work on both sides of the fence and do an equal amount of creative and technical work.
Re:very useful (Score:3, Funny)
It should be out for sale beginning or mid March, and I think the whole world is going to have to sit up and take notice.
Re:very useful (Score:3, Informative)
No it won't. I've used the latest builds of 4.0 and it is NOWHERE near ready. Not even close.
I'm afraid the Amiga reality distortion field (which puts steve jobs to shame) doesn't affect me. AmigaOS 4 in its current state is virtually unusable for doing anything useful. Nice for showing off some concepts, but that's about it.
Re:very useful (Score:5, Insightful)
In the end, the terminal is just another tool on your system. Just because someone works mainly with a GUI doesn't mean that they are not able to comprehend the command-line. Yes, the first couple of times that someone uses the command-line they are going to make some dumb mistakes but if they have a decent guide then those mistakes can be kept to a minimum and have minimal negative impact.
You might as well say that it's not worth if for a person who has never programmed to learn BASIC or C. If they don't take the first steps then how do they learn in the first place? If you are going to do anything on a computer you have to start somewhere, no matter if you are used to a GUI or not.
Re:very useful (Score:2)
Re:very useful (Score:5, Interesting)
> Just because someone works mainly with a GUI doesn't mean
> that they are not able to comprehend the command-line.
How true!. I've been a mac girl for 15 years or more, a choice I made from the sheer superiority of the mac gui when I started in prepress, in the 1980s. Nothing touched it then, though many other OSs have caught up and are just as usable today. It's experience that kept me employed, well paid and doing what I love. I got hold of OS X and nutted through cli stuff for a few years now, and use it sometimes and the gui sometimes. You're right, they're both tools that do a job, some can be done best in one, some best in either, and some don't matter one way or the other.
I hadn't touched a cli since DOS days, and even then I knew little more than dir, copy, cd and format. Now I co-admin my employer's non-X crippled linux servers. Most people are intelligent enough, and to me what counts more than experience is interest. I think if someone's interested enough to open terminal.app and poke around then it's just a matter of learning.
That's what brains are for, and we all have them!
Re:very useful (Score:2, Funny)
*Sputter*
A mac girl. You're like, a girl? Cool.
Re:very useful (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:very useful (Score:2)
Kind of put's it all in perspective doesn't it *:o)
don't be obtuse (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:very useful (Score:2, Funny)
Re:very useful (Score:4, Insightful)
That statement would ensure the death of the command line wouldn't it? I don't see many schools these days offering anything but Windows and Macs for students to learn on.
Re:very useful (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't own one because I want to join some elitist club of "creative professionals", I don't own a Mac because I think that it's somehow screwing Microsoft, I don't own a Mac because it has a candy-coated GUI, I own it because it has a solid and proven operating system derived from openstep and because it came properly set up for the hardware inside. Which for me is a prime consideration when buying a laptop.
Maybe the next laptop I buy will be x86 and Linux based again (this machine has had more than it's share of hardware failures) but OS X has always been rock solid for me, and the drivers and power management have always worked as they should, which is more than you can say for most x86 laptops even when running the OEM setup.
To me, it's just another Unix system on another flavour of hardware. Would you be telling me that I shouldn't be playing with the command line if I'd bought a SPARC laptop?
Here, for free (Score:2, Informative)
man cd
man pwd
man ls
man cp
man mv
man rm
man chmod
man more
man ps
man rm
man chmod
man more
man head
man tail
man grep
man passwd
Knock yourself out.
Re:Here, for free (Score:5, Funny)
Or better yet, enter these commands for fun... (Score:2)
got a light?
how would you describe George W. Bush's idiocy?
Make sure to type them verbatim, including all punctuation, hitting return after each one.
Re:Here, for free (Score:2)
Man formats and displays the on-line manual pages.
If that looks familiar, it's because it's the first line of the man page.
If you're still lost, I recommend you avoid the commanline
Re:Here, for free (Score:4, Insightful)
And this is the sort of response that drives people actually looking to learn UNIX away.
I have been familiar with command line since it was typed out on paper.
However, to a newbie the manual page is no more intuitively decipherable than clicking on "Start" to shutdown is on Windows.
man pages are only of use to people who already know the command line. Others need it explained to them, and I have found it far more productive to provide them with that explanation than implying they're just too stupid to read the manual.
I see that my original post is now modded as flamebait for having this underlying point. If this one is also modded as flamebait I shall suffer that fate gladly in order to stick up for people who feel they need a good book and/or a bit hand holding to get them started and oppose the "RTFM" and "YTSTRTM" attitude.
KFG
Re:Here, for free (Score:2)
For the sarcastically impaired (you, at this point), I was kidding. That's what the smiley face is all about.
But to further the discussion: anyone who isn't willing to get their hands dirty pretty quick SHOULD avoid the commandline. After all, the commandline should not be needed for ANYTHING.
Especially on OS X.
The sooner the other *nixen realize that virtually all the books and effort put into making the commandl
Re:Here, for free (Score:4, Insightful)
Even Einstein and Feynman found refering to a physics textbook and taking a course or two helpful.
The context here is reading a book, not your time. You don't have to post at all, let alone take the trouble to post that you aren't going to post helpfully.
People even find books helpful in letting them know that to shutdown you have to click on the "Start" button. Or course you find help in this matter by refering to the bundled documentation, but clicking on the "Start" button.
There's a hole in the bucket, dear Liza, dear Liza.
KFG
"vi vs pico" debate... (Score:5, Funny)
I can be more piddly than you! (Score:2)
I use nano, and I flame the pico users!
Re:I can be more piddly than you! (Score:5, Funny)
I use nano, and I flame the pico users!
Pfff. Real men cat > filename and do it right the first time.
Re:I can be more piddly than you! (Score:4, Funny)
Re:I can be more piddly than you! (Score:2, Funny)
Real men use <alt> + number pad.
Re:I can be more piddly than you! (Score:2)
Re:"vi vs pico" debate... (Score:5, Insightful)
Heh, I'm a pico user but I'm not a zealot over it. I use pico when I want to do some simple, quick editing in the command-line environment. For anything more complex I use BBEdit [barebones.com], which does pretty much everything that vi or emacs does except with a nice GUI.
But hey, use whatever works for you. Vi is certainly powerful enough. I just can't be bothered to take the time to learn all the commands, vi has a pretty high learning curve.
Re:"vi vs pico" debate... (Score:2)
Re:"vi vs pico" debate... (Score:2)
Compile EMACS for OSX! [members.shaw.ca]
EMACS binaries for OSX! [porkrind.org]
Re:"vi vs pico" debate... (Score:3, Funny)
6. Realize you forgot to learn how to quit VI.
7. CTRL-Z to stop the process
8. kill the process
Re:"vi vs pico" debate... (Score:2)
Lol, yep. I use vi so infrequently that I ALWAYS forget this kind of stuff. That's why I use pico, at least it has the little 2-line command reminder at the bottom of the window. Like I said, vi is no doubt powerful but it gives you NO hints on how to use it. They should at least have a little status line at the bottom of the window that tells you how to get help and a few other common commands.
No doubt if you use vi a ton and know it inside and out then
Re:"vi vs pico" debate... (Score:2)
Re:"vi vs pico" debate... (Score:4, Interesting)
there you go
Although I use nano [nano-editor.org] now since it is available seperately from Pine and is released under the GPL.
Re:"vi vs pico" debate... (Score:2)
Any editor that needs more of a UI than "?" and printing the number of bytes in your file is just suffering from horrible feature creep, if you ask me.
what about Mac OS for *nix geeks? (Score:5, Interesting)
I've gotten a shiny new iMac with OS X.3 on it, and I'm still learning the ropes. I'm slightly amazed at all the wierdnesses I can do with it, you can script almost anything with Applescript, and there's a million little details that do wierd shit, or behave as I'm not used to. So where is the Learning Mac OS X for the unix geek? The unix and mac world is so divided on the machine, yet works together seemlessly.
I haven't had my coffee yet, I'll ramble on about my experiences with Mac OS X elsewhere. But my question remains: what are good books/resources for the person who is already a unix geek?
Re:what about Mac OS for *nix geeks? (Score:5, Informative)
It just so happens it's available from O'Reilly as well [oreilly.com]. The Panther edition [oreilly.com] is due out in June.
Re:what about Mac OS for *nix geeks? (Score:2)
Re:what about Mac OS for *nix geeks? (Score:3, Funny)
See, even us Mac users can learn.
Re:what about Mac OS for *nix geeks? (Score:2, Informative)
Incidentally, I had the Jaguar versions of both of these books, and found them very helpful. They're very useful, even for cross-checking each other.
Oh, and Pico rules! vi drools!
Re:what about Mac OS for *nix geeks? (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.kernelthread.com/mac/osx/
why buy (Score:5, Informative)
Re:why buy (Score:5, Informative)
Helpful for newbies, but let's face it -- those links you provided cover maybe one-half of the first chapter of O'Reilly's book.
Anybody seen a hardcore unix book for Mac admins? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Anybody seen a hardcore unix book for Mac admin (Score:2)
Re:Anybody seen a hardcore unix book for Mac admin (Score:5, Informative)
Apache's files are in different places on different flavors of UNIX or Linux distributions - and they're different still if the administrator compiled from source.
On Mac OS X 10.3, configuration files are in
On Slackware 8.1, configuration files are in
On RedHat 9, configuration files are in
By default on most systems, if you've compiled from source and haven't changed any paths, configuration files are in
Re:Anybody seen a hardcore unix book for Mac admin (Score:3, Informative)
Try Running MacOSX [runningosx.com], which is like a younger brother to the venerable Running Linux [oreilly.com].
Useful information, but to whom? (Score:5, Interesting)
I think a Unix for MacOS publication would be useful for those migrating to Apple from some (any) other platform. For casual Mac users? No way is this going to be of any use to them. If they were so inclined, they'd already have some experience on another OS by now.
Re:Useful information, but to whom? (Score:2, Interesting)
So it's shouldn't be a shock that longtime Mac users have a gross adversion to commandline features.
That being said, OS X has some borderline suck, not because it has a commandline, but because there's there's a lot of tools that ship with the system (Apache, Samba, etc) that don't have a configuration GUI and must be configured "the Unix way" (which Ma
Re:Useful information, but to whom? (Score:3, Informative)
I think the taunt was moreso that win95 was just DOS with a GUI running on top of it. The fact that it had an *additional* feature in the form of a command-line wasn't the target there if I recall correctly.
Re:Useful information, but to whom? (Score:2)
Sure the GUIs they have a extremely simple but this isn't Linux you're talking about, its Mac. Its suppose to be simple. If you want to go into the conf files and tweak it, and live in the terminal window why pay extra for a mac anyway? Why not run Linux?
Mac simplifies things, but gives you the "option" to go into the terminal and screw things up.
Re:Useful information, but to whom? (Score:2)
Re:Useful information, but to whom? (Score:5, Insightful)
In my experience I've seen two types of large Mac user communities
(1) Mac users who want a simple OS, that is easy to use. They are not computer savvy and just want to use their machine to get the job done
(2) Unix / Mac users who hated Microsoft Windows for being neither powerful/stable nor simple/elegant to use.
Many of the people in the category (2) probably gravitated towards OSX quickly when it came out. People in category (1) waited for all their essential applications to be ported, before being forced to upgrade.
-Diganta
Re:Useful information, but to whom? (Score:2)
since at least 10.1, however, it's been ssh. I suspect there's a binary for telnetd lurking somewhere in /bin or /sbin, but I've never needed to look. While ssh isn't a panacea, it's much prefered... especially as a defence against the casual packet sniffer.
Re:Useful information, but to whom? (Score:5, Insightful)
I've been using Mac OS since 7, and never really used anything else (natch...I've always been in design or print production). I had to plink around in some VERY basic UNIX commands for a general computer science class in college, so I know some basic navigation and a few commands.
I have no interest in running anything but a Mac system, even just for fun, because I don't find the thought of not knowing how to do anything fun. But I'm not so stupid as to think that I can do everything I need to do in Mac OS. I've read enough tips and cool hacks and neat ways to make things work by using Terminal, that I know it would behoove me to know something beyond to basics.
If they were so inclined, they'd already have some experience on another OS by now.
So, I say BS to this. I'm inclined to learn some rudimentary stuff, but no way in hell do I care to, no imagine I could be productive in, anything else. This book sounds perfect.
Re:Useful information, but to whom? (Score:2)
As someone else already pointed out, that's a different book [oreilly.com].
For casual Mac users? No way is this going to be of any use to them. If they were so inclined, they'd already have some experience on another OS by now.
If they are so inclined and want to get that experience, they can now do so without having to use another OS to get it, and this book will help them to do so.
(posted with Safari o
Well, useful to me... (Score:2)
I switched back specifically because of OSX - I had always wanted to learn about and tinker with Unix - run PostgreSQL, whatever - but I had never got around to it because I also needed to use Office etc, and didn't want to muck about with multiple machines, or dual-boot hilarity..
Forgive Me Father, For I Am A Karma Whore... (Score:3, Informative)
Okay, okay, so it's sitting there just churning the CPU. But it looks cool enough to get me chicks, so I figured you guys could use it too.
The BSD Command Line (Score:2, Insightful)
Essentially, anyone that uses MAC OS X (if they don't already) will see the power of BSD and UNIX and general.. and will maybe move
Re:The BSD Command Line (Score:5, Insightful)
Why? Why would my parents, who only do application level stuff (web browsing, word processing, email, games), need to learn the "power of Unix"? They're non-technical end-users. They aren't concerned with harnessing the power of their machine, and nor should they have to be.
Re:The BSD Command Line (Score:2)
Jobs returning to Apple along with the buyout of NeXT brought with it a strong UNIX inclination, along with a liking for the Mach microkernel. So in a sense, it was a reprieve from death for Apple... one last chance. And they pulled it off; after years of slowly shrinking market share they're seeing slow growth (depending on who you ask. Look at "installed base" rather than "
Re:The BSD Command Line (Score:2)
But your assertion that they killed at least 3 OS initiatives (that were consecutive, not concurrent) borders on the paranoid. If that's what you were asserting; I had difficulty parsing "As for the failed attempts at a "next generation" OS at Apple, we don't really if the "failure" was for technical reasons or poli
vice versa? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:vice versa? (Score:2, Informative)
http://bhami.com/rosetta.html
Re:vice versa? (Score:3, Informative)
Authors read /. too (Score:5, Insightful)
Curious about other writing I've done? There's some useful free info online at 404 error page [404-error-page.com], particularly for Apache admins, and another book that slashdotters will appreciate is my Wicked Cool Shell Scripts [intuitive.com]. And, yes, Virginia, the latter includes specific scripts for Mac OS X too.
Transitioning from OS9 - XP or OSX? Easiest? (Score:3, Interesting)
My question is this, given that a non-technical person's experienced with both OS9 and XP, which is easier? To transition completely to XP, or to attempt to learn the new and different OSX? I don't think she's ever willingly opened a command prompt in her life.
Re:Transitioning from OS9 - XP or OSX? Easiest? (Score:5, Interesting)
But just in case, buy him/her a book like this for next birthday or valentine. Maybe he/her will finally like it? Just imagine this kind of foreplay: you and your SO together in bed, doing *things* on two powerbooks connected via Airport...
Re:Transitioning from OS9 - XP or OSX? Easiest? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Transitioning from OS9 - XP or OSX? Easiest? (Score:2)
Re:Transitioning from OS9 - XP or OSX? Easiest? (Score:2)
I should probably look into this "Preview" button thing someday.
Re:Transitioning from OS9 - XP or OSX? Easiest? (Score:3, Insightful)
Fink versus Darwinports (Score:2)
Re:Info on vi and pico..... (Score:2, Funny)
-1, Mac users have no sense of humor
-1, Joke at the expnense of someone other than M$ - note 1337 M155P3||1N6!
Re:Info on vi and pico..... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Info on vi and pico..... (Score:2)
Re:Info on vi and pico..... (Score:2)
And if you have a laptop?
Re:Info on vi and pico..... (Score:2)
The reason? When using a desktop, your hand is positioned on the mouse in such a way that right-clicking is quick and simple. However, when using a touchpad, it's far easier to keep your thumb placed permanently over the left touchpad button (or the only touchpad button on an ibook/powerbook) and use your lefthand to press control when you need to get
Re:Mac users from way back (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Too bad (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Too bad (Score:2)
You're also a troll. There is no CLI stuff under
Re:Too bad (Score:5, Insightful)
I have 644 items in
That's why there's a user level set of folders that aren't the standar UNIX convention.