[Discuss] Dropping obsolete commands (Linux Pocket Guide)

[Chris Markiewicz]

On 11/09/2015 05:19 PM, Daniel Barrett wrote:
> 
> While writing the third edition of my book, "Linux Pocket Guide"
> (O'Reilly), which focuses on Linux commands that are the most useful
> to know, I am considering dropping some topics that were in the
> previous edition. I welcome any opinions on whether the following
> commands are still widely useful enough to keep in the book.
> 
> 1. dump and restore
> 
> I grew up with these commands, but personally haven't used them in
> well over a decade. What do you think?

Been using Linux for over a decade, and never even run across these (and
they're not installed by default on Debian or Ubuntu). Looking them up,
it seems like what I'd use rsync/rsnapshot for. Do you include those?

> 2. finger and chfn
> 
> Likewise. Does anybody make use of finger information anymore, whether
> on a single host or multiple?

No.

> 3. telnet
> 
> I'm planning to mention telnet only for its utility in hitting
> arbitrary ports (telnet myhost 80), and to drop all discussion of
> remote logins with telnet, since it's largely been replaced by
> ssh. (And maybe have a footnote about kerberized telnet being OK for
> logins.)  Agree/disagree?

Agree. I might mention that it was historically used for remote login
and been obsoleted, but that's about it.

> 4. dnsdomainname, nisdomainname, ypdomainname
> 
> These are just links to /bin/hostname for convenience and I never run
> them. Do you?

No.

> 5. write and talk
> 
> More commands I grew up with, but I suspect these have been completely
> obsoleted by instant messaging. (Though I always liked "banner wake up
> | write joe". :-)) Any reason to keep them?
>
> 6. Usenet
> 
> The 2nd edition still covered slrn, but personally haven't run a
> newsreader in years.

For 5 and 6, I'd be slightly inclined to keep them, despite obsolescence
because they're still about things to explore/have some fun with. (I
guess this applies to finger as well, except there's no content, unlike
Usenet, which has, if anything, too much.)

Chris