«

If you think using a command line is a scary way to fix problems, how about Dimdows Registry edits. Look at the number of different problems, just from Microsoft's official knowledge base alone, that require running REGEDIT to fix---over 4600 hits: <http://www.google.com/search?q="type+regedit"+site%3Asupport.microsoft.c om>.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> If you think using a command line is a scary way to fix problems, how about Dimdows Registry edits. Look at the number of different problems, just from Microsoft's official knowledge base alone, that require running REGEDIT to fix---over 4600 hits: <http://www.google.com/search?q="type+regedit"+site%3Asupport.microsoft.c om>.

Opening regedit is no different to editing a conf file, and how many
linux how-tos tell you to do that?

On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 22:42:59 +1300, Richard <> wrote:

>Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> If you think using a command line is a scary way to fix problems, how about Dimdows Registry edits. Look at the number of different problems, just from Microsoft's official knowledge base alone, that require running REGEDIT to fix---over 4600 hits: <http://www.google.com/search?q="type+regedit"+site%3Asupport.microsoft.c om>.
>
>Opening regedit is no different to editing a conf file, and how many
>linux how-tos tell you to do that?
Steady on Richard,

Don't give Lawrence a straight answer, he will get confused and may
not reply.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> If you think using a command line is a scary way to fix problems, how about Dimdows Registry edits. Look at the number of different problems, just from Microsoft's official knowledge base alone, that require running REGEDIT to fix---over 4600 hits: <http://www.google.com/search?q="type+regedit"+site%3Asupport.microsoft.c om>.


what is worse is a boring sad phrat who gets his jollies doing this
windows vs linux bullshit.

...........oh thats you!!


go get a life

In message <gjknh0$n3o$>, Richard wrote:

> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> If you think using a command line is a scary way to fix problems, how
>> about Dimdows Registry edits. Look at the number of different problems,
>> just from Microsoft's official knowledge base alone, that require running
>> REGEDIT to fix---over 4600 hits:
>>
<http://www.google.com/search?q="type+regedit"+site%3Asupport.microsoft.c om>.
>
> Opening regedit is no different to editing a conf file ...

Except editing a conf file can't screw up your entire system to the point
where you have to reformat and reinstall
<http://www.google.co.nz/search?q=registry+editing+dangerous>.

On Jan 2, 10:42 pm, Richard <r...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> > If you think using a command line is a scary way to fix problems, how about Dimdows Registry edits. Look at the number of different problems, just from Microsoft's official knowledge base alone, that require running REGEDIT to fix---over 4600 hits: <http://www.google.com/search?q="type+regedit"+site%3Asupport.microsoft.c om>.
>
> Opening regedit is no different to editing a conf file, and how many
> linux how-tos tell you to do that?

Extremely different. The registry hives are large, complex and have
no facilities for embedded documentation. Much of it consists of
arcane codings for which there is no published documentation. There
is no explicit 'save' function - it 'saves' as it goes.

A conf file is small 'flat' and simple. It is possible to include
comment lines. The 'sample' ones for Samba and Grub for example are
extensively commented so they virtually are built-in 'howto's'. There
is generally extensive applications documentation explaining the
operation of the conf files associated with applications - eg Apache
which has a very extensive conf system with multiple configuration
files.

Open source software ported to Windows generally retains their own
configuration files and do not rely on the registry.

peterwn wrote:
>>
>> Opening regedit is no different to editing a conf file, and how many
>> linux how-tos tell you to do that?
>
> Extremely different. The registry hives are large, complex and have
> no facilities for embedded documentation. Much of it consists of
> arcane codings for which there is no published documentation. There
> is no explicit 'save' function - it 'saves' as it goes.
>
The registry hives are databases, and use a simple key/value structure.
What's arcane about that? However, registry hives are not designed for
direct access - what database is? If fixes are required (eg to remove an
Antivirus program such as Norton AV) this is because the program does
not maintain the database properly, and in general instructions are
given in detail. The end user should not fiddle with the registry.
>
> A conf file is small 'flat' and simple. It is possible to include
> comment lines. The 'sample' ones for Samba and Grub for example are
> extensively commented so they virtually are built-in 'howto's'. There
> is generally extensive applications documentation explaining the
> operation of the conf files associated with applications - eg Apache
> which has a very extensive conf system with multiple configuration
> files.
>
Yes and they are all different in format. Apache doesn't use '=' to
separate the variable from the value. Samba doesn't (I believe). Grub
has a syntax which is truly arcane (eg hd(0,0) for a hard disk). In file
comments are fine, but they don't show all the options. You have to
search elsewhere for that. Conf files could reside almost anywhere - on
Debian the exim conf files lives in /var/lib/exim of all places.

The end user should not fiddle with the conf files, but often has to. To
do so he has to a) find it, b) figure out the often bizarre syntax (eg
the BNR format used in sudoers), c) figure out what the parameter values
are available and appropriate, d) debug the weird and cryptic error
messages if something goes wrong.

They are about the same. I've used both.

Cheers,

Cliff

--

Tax is not theft.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> In message <gjknh0$n3o$>, Richard wrote:
>
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> If you think using a command line is a scary way to fix problems, how
>>> about Dimdows Registry edits. Look at the number of different problems,
>>> just from Microsoft's official knowledge base alone, that require running
>>> REGEDIT to fix---over 4600 hits:
>>>
> <http://www.google.com/search?q="type+regedit"+site%3Asupport.microsoft.c om>.
>> Opening regedit is no different to editing a conf file ...
>
> Except editing a conf file can't screw up your entire system to the point
> where you have to reformat and reinstall
> <http://www.google.co.nz/search?q=registry+editing+dangerous>.
>
Heh! It can come pretty close. But linux has a 'rescue mode' called
'single user mode' that an *experienced* user can use to get out an
unwise change to, say, a /etc/pam.d file or fstab that stops a system
from booting.

Windows has a rescue mode too, but many people have never learnt to use
it properly.

I looked at the link by the way. It is an advert for an automated
registry cleaner. Registry cleaners are not required! No wonder it makes
such a song and dance about editing the registry.

Cheers,

Cliff

--

Tax is not theft.

In message
<d2fed2cc-8f9f-479a-94cd->,
peterwn wrote:

> The registry hives are large, complex and have no facilities for embedded
> documentation.

Or the equivalents of simple file-manipulation tools. E.g. backing up a
single config file before messing with it is as simple as

cp -p /etc/X11/xorg.conf /etc/X11/xorg.conf-save

There are admins who even put their entire config directory into version
control. How's that for keeping track of all your changes?

Another telling thing is that Microsoft's PowerShell lets you treat the
Registry as a filesystem--within the limitations of PowerShell, of course.
Talk about coming full circle...

Enkidu wrote:
> peterwn wrote:
> >>
>>> Opening regedit is no different to editing a conf file, and how many
>>> linux how-tos tell you to do that?
>>
>> Extremely different. The registry hives are large, complex and have
>> no facilities for embedded documentation. Much of it consists of
>> arcane codings for which there is no published documentation. There
>> is no explicit 'save' function - it 'saves' as it goes.
>>
> The registry hives are databases, and use a simple key/value structure.
> What's arcane about that? However, registry hives are not designed for
> direct access - what database is? If fixes are required (eg to remove an
> Antivirus program such as Norton AV) this is because the program does
> not maintain the database properly, and in general instructions are
> given in detail. The end user should not fiddle with the registry.

In the perfect world, nobody should ever need to look at the registry.
Woe to the user who needs to. What I find daunting is the number of
different places in the registry where information about a program is
stored.