Blakey don't ssh
-
Illiterate or retarded? Place your bets.
Unfortunately I don't have enough information to judge which one you're committing. It's also possible you never heard of it before.
-
It seems that @blakeyrat's workflow is to use as many programs that accomplish the same task in different ways as possible in the most inefficient order possible.
So instead of:
puttygen -> copy -> paste
he has
github for windows -> git bash -> ssh-keygen -> copy -> paste -> puttygen -> copy -> paste
-
Only if you can get your script under version control...
Of course it is.
It's in git, where else?
-
"PuTTY" format
That's SourceTree's fault, not SSH's.
THEN WHOEVER DESIGNED SSH SURE FUCKED UP DIDN'T THEY?!
No, The original purpose of SSH is enabling secure remote shell access.
ssh-copy-idis a nice little script that automatically configures a remote server for key-based authentication by changing the configuration files in your user's home directory. If the admin of the remote server disables shell access or does other strange things,ssh-copy-iddoesn't work anymore. Surprise, surprise.SSH is one of the few old UNIX tools that's actually well-designed. Stop making yourself look stupid by claiming the opposite and concentrate on mocking tools which actually suck instead.
BTW: Does anyone know how good/user-friendly the SSH support in Windows 10 is? Do the previews support that feature yet?
-
Of all the slight misfeatures in PuTTY, its failure to use the same format for keys as the OpenSSH project that preceded it is probably the slight misfeature I find slightly more annoying than any of the others.
That's a very nice way of saying that PuTTy is the most user-hostile piece of shitty software ever created.
-
Unless you're using GitHub for Windows and SourceTree simultaneously, which is what I'm fucking DOING you dumb motherfucker.
So why not login with your ordinary user credentials (username/password). Github for windows supports bitbucket and source tree supports github. Personally I would recommend droping github for windows because it sucks at sub-modules.I'd say the SSH approach the "Lotus Notes Way", since it's basically the same idea as Lotus Notes' .id file.
DO NOT GET ME STARTED ABOUT LOTUS NOTES... I am just batteling with it again.... please do not use the words IBM or Notes in any way.
-
Yes you do.
No you don't. You can use PuTTYgen both to generate a key and export it in OpenSSH format. Exporting the public key is easy, that's just copy and paste from the main window.
If you need an OpenSSH-format private key as well, as it appears that you do: you need to (a) understand that OpenSSH is the name of the format you need your key saved in and (b) use the appropriate export option from the Conversions menu.
-
It seems that @blakeyrat's workflow is to use as many programs that accomplish the same task in different ways as possible in the most inefficient order possible.
...thus facilitating the whinging process.
-
I have customers who are rightly suspicious of remote support tools that go via third party servers, and I've set up remote support for them using PuTTY and UltraVNC on their end, OpenSSH and Remmina on mine.
You may want to check out gitso.
It has nothing to do with git, unlike what the name suggests: gitso stands for "gitso is there to support others".
-
It seems that @blakeyrat's workflow is to use as many programs that accomplish the same task in different ways as possible in the most inefficient order possible.
How else will he have things to complain about?
-
SSH is one of the few old UNIX tools that's actually well-designed.
Then why is it so fucking difficult to use?
I call 'em as I see 'em.
So why not login with your ordinary user credentials (username/password). Github for windows supports bitbucket
No it doesn't, Ben L made that up.
and source tree supports github
Well, awesome, but the code's not on GitHub so that doesn't help me.
Personally I would recommend droping github for windows because it sucks at sub-modules.
So does everything. Submodules aren't even has half-baked as the rest of the shitty half-baked Git tools.
DO NOT GET ME STARTED ABOUT LOTUS NOTES... I am just batteling with it again.... please do not use the words IBM or Notes in any way.
I call 'em as I see 'em.
There's no difference between having to generate a .id file in Lotus Notes and moving it physically to the client machine than there is in having to generate a SSH public key and copying it onto the website before you can use it. The only difference is the server/client is reversed.
No you don't. You can use PuTTYgen both to generate a key and export it in OpenSSH format.
If you can do that, it's too difficult to figure out.
Exporting the public key is easy, that's just copy and paste from the main window.
The word "easy" does not apply to ANYTHING PuTTY does. It doesn't even come within an order of magnitude to "easy".
Edit: hey, here's a quizzler: if PuTTY supports the "normal" SSH file format (the one Git expects), why doesn't it just fucking use that file format by default!???!???!?!
How else will he have things to complain about?
I have to use 3 different Git clients, because all Git clients are half-baked. The only one that seems to support most (all?) of Git functionality is SourceTree, but I can't use it day-to-day because it's UI is atrociously awful.
-
Then why is it so fucking difficult for idiots like me to use?
To ask it is to answer it. Once MS finally joins the party, maybe it won't be so awful on Windows.
-
maybe it won't be so awful on Windows
I'm fully expecting that the native MS implementation will run in a standard Windows console window, and therefore inherit all the awful that comes with.
-
if we're super lucky it will run in powershell instead.
that's still not as good as proper BASH or ZSH but it's better than
CMD.COMMAND.comcomexeEdit: corrected executable names
-
better than CMD.com
That's a low bar. (It could be worse; the original COMMAND.COM is remembered by some of us…)
-
right. sorry, got the name wrong.
look it's been a while since the windows 9x days and that's a lot of vodka damage to those memory neurons too!
-
If you can do that, it's too difficult to figure out.
Yes, I thought you might find it so; it involves choosing one option from a non-Ribbon-style menu, which is something I guessed you'd forgotten how to do. But you don't even need to figure it out, because I have already told you how to do it twice in this very thread, including linkage to the appropriate spots inside the PuTTYgen online manual.
-
Yes, I thought you might find it so; it involves choosing one option from a non-Ribbon-style menu, which is something I guessed you'd forgotten how to do
OH SNAP! SARCASM!
But you don't even need to figure it out, because I have already told you how to do it twice in this very thread, including linkage to the appropriate spots inside the PuTTYgen online manual.
Tell me 8 more times, then I'll re-assess whether I give a shit what you think.
-
it will run in powershell instead
Do you mean inside the powershell IDE thing? Good luck finding termcap settings that work with that.
-
powershell IDE
the one with the blue background by default, yes.
Good luck finding termcap settings that work with that.
yeah that will be tricky, but it would be less painful than the black terminal that you can't make wider because rasins that cmd.exe uses
-
Tell me 8 more times
Export an SSH-2 key in OpenSSH format
Export an SSH-2 key in OpenSSH format
Export an SSH-2 key in OpenSSH format
Export an SSH-2 key in OpenSSH format
Export an SSH-2 key in OpenSSH format
Export an SSH-2 key in OpenSSH format
Export an SSH-2 key in OpenSSH format
Export an SSH-2 key in OpenSSH format
-
vodka damage to those memory neurons
Necessary damage, I'm sure. (I prefer whisky damage myself.
)
-
the black terminal that you can't make wider because rasins
Yeah, you can; just not by dragging the thing. Right-click the title bar, choose Properties; the options you need are on the Layout tab.
It's a little unfortunate that you can't get more than 9999 lines of scrollback but meh.
-
So why not login with your ordinary user credentials (username/password). Github for windows supports bitbucket
No it doesn't, Ben L made that up.
Yes it does.
Drag folder ontop of github for windows.. make change. commit.. push...... and it will ask for your credentials. et voila connectedOther option... go to bitbucket.. click your repo.. right top corner click clone.. select the URL... drag-drop url onto github for windows... it will ask you a folder it will ask for your credentials. et voila connected
-
the options you need are on the Layout tab.
....... WTF?!
why are they there?! and why can't that thing be hooked up to scale vertically and horizontally by scrolling?!
i mean it would be one thing if you couldn't drag it taller either, but dude! that's not cool!
-
-
Drag folder ontop of github for windows..
....what in the UI of GHfW leads a user to believe that's a logical action to take, let alone how you add a repo hosted on a service that it doesn't claim to support?!
-
We thought you knew…
i avoid cmd.exe if at all posible. i reach for cygwin's terminal to run windows commands before i reach for powereshell (which is new) before i reach for cmd.exe
so i never used it long enough to need to find that out
-
hey, here's a quizzler: if PuTTY supports the "normal" SSH file format (the one Git expects), why doesn't it just fucking use that file format by default!???!???!?!
-
I learned to use COMMAND.COM back in the day when that was all that was available. (I still hate to think of chains of ERRORLEVEL tests used to figure out what failed.) When XP came along, I tried out the new (to me) CMD.EXE and it worked better than what I'd been using before with Windows, but it was still nothing like as easy as working with any bourne shell derivative.
I have used Windows as my primary system in the past. I used to be really rather proficient in scripting it. (This was before powershell was a thing.) I don't want to do that any more.
-
why are they there?!
Tradition? Console windows were designed to emulate the behavior of fullscreen DOS, and they've never really changed much.
and why can't that thing be hooked up to scale vertically and horizontally by scrolling?!
Once you've set it to be 200 characters wide (or whatever) you can make it narrower by dragging the window edge, but doing that gets you a horizontal scroll bar; it doesn't change the text wrap width.
For extra shits and giggles, open a cmd window and run wmic.exe inside it. Boom! Instant horizontally scrollable width! But it goes away when wmic.exe exits.
That's not wmic.exe's only weird trick: try running it inside a for /f command... the output from wmic.exe is in UTF-16, which for /f does a truly shitty job of converting to ASCII before parsing; you end up with a spurious extra \r at the end of every line.
-
-
-
Command.com's been gone for a decade or 15 years or whatever.
cmd.exe is far better (but no bash, admittedly).
-
-
why are they there?! and why can't that thing be hooked up to scale vertically and horizontally by scrolling?!
Because you're not supposed to use it in this day and age?
-
Show me another Windows scripting tool with all of the following features:
- Scripts run in a scrolling text window
- Scripts run when you double-click them
- Script interpreter is sure to be available on any Windows installation including POS terminals etc
- Useful scripts can be written in under 100 bytes of text
Cmd is an esolang, of that there is no doubt. But saying it has no reasonable use cases is just wrong.
-
Show me another Windows scripting tool with all of the following features:
Powershell. Where I always smile to see that
lsworks.
-
But saying it has no reasonable use cases is just wrong.
I didn't say that, and I use it every day. But MS wishes we wouldn't, is all I meant.
QED they have no motivation to add features like resize via scrollbar. For one thing I'm sure that would break all kinds of command-line programs that assume 80x25.
-
Yes it does.Drag folder ontop of github for windows.. make change. commit.. push...... and it will ask for your credentials. et voila connected
Right it supports it...
AFTER you've gone through the SSH pain.
You are technically correct, as was Ben, and yet that's not what we were talking about. And also this thread is getting repetitive as shit.
-
Does your server support username/password auth or just public key auth?
-
....what in the UI of GHfW leads a user to believe that's a logical action to take, let alone how you add a repo hosted on a service that it doesn't claim to support?!
I'm a Mac user; I always expect drag&drop to work. If it doesn't, it's a bug.
It's Windows application developers who took fucking ages to catch-on to drag&drop. Windows itself has supported it fine since Windows 95. Windows application developers are the worst, as we've discussed, and frequently have no idea what features the OS they've chosen to write software for even has.
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/wishlist/key-formats-natively.html
Needs many tuits.
Oh right. It needs many tuits. How silly of me. That's obviously the reason.
Scripts run in a scrolling text window
Scripts run when you double-click them
Script interpreter is sure to be available on any Windows installation including POS terminals etc
Useful scripts can be written in under 100 bytes of textWSH supports three of the four bullet points, and is what superseded CMD about 15 years ago ish. (And why the fuck is "runs in a scrolling text window" desireable in any way, BTW?)
PowerShell supports all four, for various definitions of "useful scripts". It's a little verbose. Probably still less verbose than WSH though.
-
Does your server support username/password auth or just public key auth?
All I know is SourceTree claims it can log onto it with a username/pass, but when I try it goes into zombie "time-out without timing-out" mode. Because it's a broken piece of shit.
-
Are you logging in over http/https or ssh?
-
Powershell.
Can't rely on scripts running when you double-click them; default PS settings mean they won't.
-
What about an EXE?
-
Can't rely on scripts running when you double-click them;
They will if you sign 'em, at least that's my understanding. But if I'm wrong, I'm wrong.
I still want to know why "scrolling text window" is desirable. though.
What about an EXE?
C# is so easy to write, you'd complete your "script" quicker as a C# console application. Which you could then double-click, have a scrolling text window, is less than 100 bytes (note to pedantic dickweeds: no you do not count the runtime, go away), etc.
-
It's true, for my main powershell script that I use every morning, I launch it through CMD, which runs the ps1 with remotesigned active. That was all the effort I felt like putting in.
-
I still want to know why "scrolling text window" is desirable. though.
First thing that comes to mind is you can obviously see what was happening just by using the scrollbar, and the person who wrote the script/program doesn't have to write even a single line of code to support that. By contrast, at a minimum a GUI has to put in a text box or something and then write code to spew output to it (and remember, hopefully, not to forget to send any output there.)
-
why the fuck is "runs in a scrolling text window" desireable in any way, BTW?
Where the fuck did I say it was? Oh that's right, I didn't. +1 for blakey's shoulder aliens.
:not sure if trolling.gif:
