I know that GUI does not cover most of functionalities, for good reasons - being specialized to task (like files app), it provides more fine-grained experience.

Yet, I find that there are common commands which is terminal-only, or not faithfully implemented. for instance,

  • Commands like apt update/apt upgrade might be needed, as GUI may not allow enough interactions with it.
  • I heard some immutable distros require running commands for rollbacks.

These could cause some annoyance for those who want to avoid terminal unless necessary (including me). Hence, I bet there are terminal emulators which restricts what commands you could run, and above all, present them as buttons. This will make you recall the commonly used commands, and run them accordingly. Is there projects similar to what I describe? Thanks!

  • AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Rather than creating a custom terminal, could you create a user that only had permission to run the restricted commands, with a profile script that gets run at login and offers a menu of common tasks?

  • pivot_root@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I understand the desire to want to avoid the command line, but you’re severely restricting your ability to troubleshoot by doing so. Every operating system has a terminal and command line, and there’s going to be cases where you’ll want to drop into a shell to do something that has no GUI equivalent.

    • WbrJr@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      I dont think you should habe to learn to usw the terminal in order to debug your operating system. If i would switch my mom to Linux, i dont want her to have to use the terminal. So making life easier for those people would grealty improve the appeal of Linux to tech noobs. By arguing we need the terminal for Linux, we gatekeep people from trying and using Linux, if they are afraid of technology

      • Telorand@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        You should see if there’s a Windows equivalent (since it has the most market share by a country mile). If it does, use that for ideas, and improve upon it. If not, it may not be feasible or reasonable based on your goals.

  • k4j8@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Interesting idea. If you really break it down, the “terminal with command buttons” is similar in concept to saving each of the commands as a script and putting those scripts in a directory to act as “buttons.”

    I’ve also seen some programs such as Kopia, a backup tool, that provide a GUI with the equivalent terminal commands for what is bring done shown at the bottom.

    I don’t think what you’re describing exists, probably because experts don’t need it and beginners would prefer a full GUI.

    There is Nushell, which promises more helpful error responses for the terminal, but its too early for it to be targeted at beginners in my opinion.

    • Nibodhika@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      As much as I love nushell it will ever be too early for beginners, POSIX compliance is a big problem there. They have their very good reasons to not be POSIX compliant, but someone starting out should familiarize themselves with the most common pattern first before jumping to something completely different that will prevent them from running code snippets they might find online.

  • refalo@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    I know that GUI does not cover most of functionalities

    specialized to task

    Yet, I find that there are common commands

    present them as buttons

    Congratulations you just reinvented the GUI while trying to get away from it at the same time.

    Perhaps something a little more “in-between” the two might be a GUI that allows running arbitrary programs… something smarter than a launcher but more generic than a purpose-built function-limited interface… if such a thing can even exist.

      • refalo@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        I don’t think there is one yet… it would need some kind of way to understand the possible options and parameters for any given CLI program, and without a standardized interface for that, error-prone scraping of --help or just hard-coding popular options is probably the best you could do. Hopefully it wouldn’t end up looking something like the Scratch programming IDE though.

        This reminds of jc which is kindof the opposite where it scrapes the output of common commands to present a more unified (JSON) syntax for other programs to consume and automate better.

        • someacnt_@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          Hmm, --help parsing can be screwy, I guess. Maybe there is a way through autocompletion machinery.

  • boredsquirrel@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I think you could get really happy with fish or at least bash history autocompletion.

    A flexible command runner, easy to add new buttons, spawning a terminal window to show the results, would also be useful.

    I agree on the issue

  • Chris Gerber@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    You could create a list of commands in a text file, and then pipe that into fzf. With a light wrapper that would allow you to type a portion of the command to select and execute it.

  • mkwt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    For example, synaptic is a long running front end for apt that has the buttons for update and upgrade.

  • palordrolap@kbin.run
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Coming back to this with thoughts. What you’re describing sounds a lot like a menu tree.

    “Press 1 to do this, 2 to do that, 3 to go to submenu A, 4 for B,” etc. 1

    “You have pressed 1. Do you want to turn on option ABC? [Y / n]” Y

    “Do you want option QWERTY47? [Y/n]” N

    “Are you sure you want to run notthebees --abc --no-qwerty47? [Y/n]” N

    “Aborted.”

    It sounds like a standards problem waiting to happen because no two menus will be alike, but hey, things like this can and do exist, and setting one up isn’t that hard, only time consuming.

    • Static_Rocket@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Something like this can kind of be achieved programmatically by unraveling bash completion arguments and loosely parsing terminal help strings.

      They aren’t all formatted uniformly though, so you’ll need to come up with a filtering mechanism to prevent returning garbage. You’ll also always be a little out of date…

    • Telorand@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      This was my thought exactly. And I also had the same assessment that having various arguments be context aware would be challenging, since some have sub-arguments of their own (with further sub-arguments of their own, etc.) but can sometimes be strung together all on the same line. How do you determine if someone wants an ascendant argument or a descendant argument when you’re three layers deep into the tree?

      You would have to make opinionated decisions, which was the whole reason to avoid scripts in the first place. Seems like it would be better to just make executable scripts (which is what Fedora Atomics basically do with the just command) or gamify learning how to work in the terminal.

  • nmtake@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Long ago I made such restricted shell with filtering the shell command history file then disabling command history logging. With some shell scripting, I think you can get more sophisticated version. What shell are you using? (Bash, Fish, Zsh, etc.)

    • someacnt_@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      I am using bash, which is indeed part of the problem. What emulator would you suggest, and how did you achieve it?

      • nmtake@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Bash should be fine. On typical Bash installation I think this will work (please try to understand each command line before you actually try):

        $ cp ~/.bashrc ~/.bashrc.bak
        $ cp ~/.bash_history ~/.bash_history.bak
        $ printf 'set +o history' >> ~/.bashrc
        $ printf "sudo apt update\nsudo apt upgrade\n" > .bash_history
        $ (Press Ctrl+D to logout)
        

        For the next bash session you can refer only the two commands from the history with Up/Down/C-p/C-n.

  • Nibodhika@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    The thing is that there is no middle ground, the terminal you described would either have the problems of a GUI (limited interactivity) or the problems of a CLI (unintuitive).

    If you do a button to do things you’ve removed option to do different things, if you ask them for text you’ve removed the intuitivity of a button. If you present less options you might not cover all cases, if you present more options it’s a regular terminal.

    It seems that the issue you have is that you need a way to quickly redo commands you’ve done before and you need a good way to know what options you have. I have 2 CLI solutions for you.

    1. If you press Ctrl+R and start typing a command it will auto-complete to the latest command you ran that matches

    2. If you install zsh and grml-zsh-config and switch to zsh you will have a very powerful auto-complete that will allow you to press tab to auto-complete most parameters of most common operations.

    • someacnt_@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Yeah, I understand that this is difficult. But I am suggesting this considering lack of polish (ime) in commands.

      On the recalling, remembering entire commands is not the problematic one for me. Rather, I want a quick way to go with which apps do which.

      Also, terminals (that is, how most of the commands run) honestly do not look and feel good. I do think polished TUI could be a good solution, but they are not widespread.

  • 1984@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I think it would be very awkward, because then you need to look for the right button, move your mouse to it, click it, and then start looking for the next button, click it and so on.

    For simple scenarios share you just need to click install, the gui can be great, but I think it’s not good enough for most commands with flags and options.

  • brianorca@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    This actually exists, but for a different operating system. The AS400 (aka iSeries) had a command line where programs had a standard way to specify parameters, so that pressing a prompt key (F4) would allow you to build the proper command line by filling a form. I do miss that, pity it doesn’t exist for Linux.

  • gomp@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    I bet that doesn’t exist: nobody would put work in a program that lets just restricts what you can do with zero usability advantages (ok someone might)

    If you fear you might run unsafe commands just save whatever you are comfortable running in scripts and restrict yourself to run those instead of manually typing commands you don’t fully remember/understand.

    BTW: topgrade will detect what needs updating in your system (your distro’s package manager, flatpak, python stuff, … whatever) and update all the things

    BTW: “terminal emulator” is the program that shows you text in a window, the program that runs inside it and validates/interprets your commands is a “shell” (the one you are using is most probably bash)

    • someacnt_@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Calling it “terminal emulator” was a poor word usage on my end, yeah. I do not fear myself running command line though. I just want to avoid CLI.