Who are these for? People who use the terminal but don’t like running shell commands?

OK sorry for throwing shade. If you use one of these, honestly, what features do you use that make it worthwhile?

          • tal@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I think – though I was not one of them – that that’s how people tended to use OFMs in their heyday. Like, my “home” program, the program that I’m doing most other things from, is bash, whereas I think for a lot of people on DOS systems, it was an OFM rather than command.com.

      • SomeBoyo@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s faster. Because I have to move directorys relatively often from different drives on my server and nemo seems to be moving the files to my local machine before moving them to their right location on the server.

    • bizdelnick@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      But you don’t need to cd before running ls. And in most cases you don’t even need ls, autocompletion is enough.

    • lucullus@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Isn’t your shell showing autocomplete options on oressing tab? Like the subdirectories? That way you don’t need multiple cd and ls calls

  • jasondj@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I never use them but I can see the point. Like when you’re poking around for a log file, not sure what it’s called or where it’s stored and just going on a hunch…but you’re in an SSH session and don’t want to deal with X shenanigans.

    It’s a legit PITA to ls, look for files, cat/tail them, etc. sometimes you just want to ls -alR but your corporate build runs tmux on SSH sessions with no configuration so you can’t scroll back since your shortcuts don’t work so you have to pipe everything to more and it just sucks.

    • cybersandwich@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      Id actually say, for super basic stuff the shell commands are faster. And super complicated stuff, shell commands are faster.

      But it’s that set of things in the middle of the bell curve that are more complicated that moving a single file and less complicated than running a bash script one liner that strings together 8 commands that these terminal browsers really shine.

      • Geronimo Wenja@agora.nop.chat
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        My favourite one is renaming a directory full of files in nnn. It opens in vim, and I’m in my happy place, where I really know how to edit text (or, in this case, filenames). Great when there’s some minor variation between a lot of files. Full previewing before saving, multiple operations handled before doing anything etc.

  • daniskarma@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    Sometimes they are more convenient, than cd ls mv cp everything, when you don’t have access to a file explorer.

    Specially if you are working with a server via ssh, or some machine without any Desktop Environment installed.

  • tal@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I use dired in Emacs.

    I assume you mean “why use these instead of file-manipulation commands in bash?”

    I use both.

    There are a handful of tasks that are easier in dired than bash.

    • Making small modifications to filenames that aren’t amenable to programmatic changes. You can just toggle the read-only flag on a dired buffer, edit the filenames, and then hit C-c C-c when done.

    • Marking a set of files to perform an operation on where that set cannot trivially be expressed using tools in bash. Think, oh, “which movies do I like enough to want to keep around”. This is especially handy when moving a number of files to another directory, which I think is why people often like the two-pane approach of orthodox file managers. Dired is not an OFM, but it can act like that if you have two dired windows open, using the other as the default target for the operation.

    • Dealing with filenames containing obnoxious-to-type characters like weird Unicode stuff. If I want to delete the one file in a directory whose name consists of a bunch of kanji, it’s easier to just manually select it in a list.

    • Navigating where I usually want to see the contents of each directory. I’ll often navigate around in dired while building up up an emms playlist. Browsing a list of movies to play.

    EDIT: It’s also not really a file manager, but I do use ncdu to see what’s taking up space on a disk. I’ll also use du -h|sort -h|less, but ncdu is, like file managers, more convenient when just browsing around the tree and looking at each as one does so, while manually selecting a few items to operate on (deleting).

    EDIT2: I’ll also add that virtually all of the people I know in person who love OFMs – I’m in the US – are from Eastern Europe, moved to the US from Russia, Ukraine, Romania, etc. I dunno why that is. Maybe just spreading along language lines. Maybe there are or were issues with switching between Cyrillic and Latin character stuff akin to my above irritation with kanji. But someone from Eastern Europe might have more input to answer your question.

    EDIT3: The link I provided above for OFMs has a very long discussion from the author on why he likes OFMs (though not all terminal file managers are OFMs, many, like Midnight Commander, are). Reading it, I’d say that there’s a lot of overlap with how Emacs works with dired+TRAMP+eshell and some other Emacs packages, though they accomplish similar goals in a different way – sort of making integrated functionality that spans network file transfer, file management, text editing, file archive access, console commands, with a common toolset available for all. Would be quicker to learn an OFM than Emacs, though Emacs is gonna provide a considerably-larger set of functionality if you’re willing to spend the time on it.

    EDIT4: There are also a number of OFMs in Emacs, like Sunrise Commander, so I guess I shouldn’t really treat it as an either-or matter.

    • dino@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Is it common than whenever somebody brings up “emacs” its a wall of text? Please don’t take seriously.

      • donio@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It has paragraphs and an unordered list so it’s technically not a wall of text :)
        There is truth in it though, it’s fun to ramble on about all the cool stuff that we get to do with Emacs.

          • donio@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            The comment was talking about dired which is a file manager that runs inside Emacs and Emacs can be used in terminal mode.

  • TimeSquirrel@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    With some people, it’s just easier and faster to navigate a filesystem structure if you can just see it all laid out in front of you visually instead of “cd-ing” and “ls-ing” every directory you traverse just to see what’s in it and having to “pwd” and remember where you are. Some of us didn’t do too well at the memory game as kids.

  • atetulo@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s really annoying navigating a filesystem in the shell.

    Either you remember exactly where a file is located, have a reference, or you’re going to be doing a lot of “ls, cd, ls, cd”.

  • indigomirage@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    One of the first things I install is mc (sometimes ranger). It’s just a really fast way to get around.

    CLI is fast, but GUI is (if done right) intuitive. Running mc is both. Very fast way to explore/get around file system.

    • JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Maybe you are confusing GUI with TUI. Intuitive, yes, but hard to believe that GUI is faster than anything much.

      • indigomirage@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think I was trying to say that mc combines the intuitiveness of a GUI with the efficiency of a CLI. A TUI.

  • mcepl@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    People who can use them effectively tend to be a way faster with the regular admin work. Also, they can do some things which are not that simple on the command line (browse through tarball, browse through remote directories).

  • Kanda@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    I use it more or less to browse my multimedia files. Ranger knows if it’s a pdf or a mkv file, so I don’t have to do anything but hit enter. When watching a series, I hit Q in mpv, down arrow and enter to play the next episode instead of writing mpv tab tab enter. It’s also got pretty nice tools for mass renaming, deletion, and probably a lot more that I didn’t bother learning. But if I want to get a specific file, say a config file, then I just open it normally with an editor from the terminal instead of going from /home to / to /etc

  • bender223@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    For me, it’s about using the right tool for the job. Sometimes, using full GUI file manager is overkill, especially for copying just one file, and you know exactly where you want to copy it from and to.

    And a TUI file manager like mc, ranger, nnn are a good in between level of ui, and is great for browsing files distraction free from the visual clutter of a full GUI file manager. That may seem like not a big deal, but I think it’s nice to be able to see things simply and straight to the point. For me, it just feels nice and less frustrating.

    What I like about Linux is choice. And in this case, choice in file management. Pick the right tool, and you’ll get things done more efficiently, and with less annoyance.

  • chayleaf@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    for example, when you need to copy some files and not the other, you can take your time selecting the specific files you need to copy instead of writing the list of files in one command. When you want to check the contents of a lot of files, you can just open file preview. Etc, basically sometimes CLI isn’t as convenient as TUI/GUI

  • JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Anecdata: I had been “running shell commands” happily enough for 15 years. And then I tried Ranger. It was immediately clear that everything is faster, sometimes much faster. This supposes that you are familiar with basic Vi key bindings. It’s not about “features”, it’s much simpler than that, it’s about keystrokes.

    • TheHarpyEagle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      The more time I spend on development at work and at home, the more I truly despise constantly switching from mouse to keyboard and back. I’m no power user, but I may well check this out.