perl and ssh

[ews]

when will microsoft come out of the 80's and ship with an ssh server,
client, and perl interpreter?

seriously.. whats the problem.

vbs and wsh is becoming increasingly more unacceptable as our robots are
becoming more relied upon and more intelligent.

 

[William Hymen]

I just installed Open SSH and the user gets
a bash shell when connected. How many
Windows users know BASH?
I had to uninstall it. It's usless.

 

[ews]

I just installed Open SSH and the user gets
a bash shell when connected. How many
Windows users know BASH?
I had to uninstall it. It's usless.

saying bash is useless severely lowers your cli credibility with me. it
was not my intention to give the users bash, as most can hardly operate
windows with any degree of efficiency. bash and perl are excellent admin
tools and would add mounds of goodness to the usability and
administration of windows. just because a portion of the user population
doesnt know how to use a tool, doesnt make it useless. do you know how
to operate a plasma cutter? does that make it useless? part of the
problem may be exposure, since those tools are excluded, many ppl dont
even know they exist or how useful they really are.

i sincerely hope you are not in any type of position to make decisions
on what gets shipped with windows. perl is by far more useful and robust
than vbs/wsh (do i even need to say CPAN?), ssh is more secure than
telnet, and bash (which i didnt even mention in my original post), is
decades ahead of cmd.exe.

seriously, stop clicking all day and automate something.

 

[3legs]

finally someone is getting to the point!

saying bash is useless severely lowers your cli credibility with me. it
was not my intention to give the users bash, as most can hardly operate
windows with any degree of efficiency. bash and perl are excellent admin
tools and would add mounds of goodness to the usability and administration
of windows. just because a portion of the user population doesnt know how
to use a tool, doesnt make it useless. do you know how to operate a plasma
cutter? does that make it useless? part of the problem may be exposure,
since those tools are excluded, many ppl dont even know they exist or how
useful they really are.

i sincerely hope you are not in any type of position to make decisions on
what gets shipped with windows. perl is by far more useful and robust than
vbs/wsh (do i even need to say CPAN?), ssh is more secure than telnet, and
bash (which i didnt even mention in my original post), is decades ahead of
cmd.exe.

seriously, stop clicking all day and automate something.

 

[Alexander Suhovey]

Perl is shipped with Windows Resource Kit to run perl scripts that are
included in RK.
I just wonder, who forbids you from installing all you need? Why you need it
to be _shipped_ with Windows? I can't see the point.

Al

 

[William Hymen]

You missed my point completely. If I install
a Windows tool, I want a Windows shell presented
to the users, not a BASH shell.

If I installed a UNIX shell tool
on your UNIX box, how would you react
if you got a VMS shell or a TANDEM shell
when you ran it??

Should I expect you to learn VMS ot TANDEM to use
a UNIX tool? ... I think not.

Pure Personal Opinion.

Bill

 

[ews]

Perl is shipped with Windows Resource Kit to run perl scripts that are
included in RK.
I just wonder, who forbids you from installing all you need? Why you need it
to be _shipped_ with Windows? I can't see the point.

Al

ever try to implement a perl script that needs to run locally on 1000
workstations, who dont have perl installed? with an IT dept of 6 and no
software mgmt tools, going out to each workstation to install an
interpreter is absurd. how hard would it really be to just include it?
windows media player comes bundled on server versions of windows for
christs sake. tell me whats more useful.

e-

 

[ews]

You missed my point completely. If I install
a Windows tool, I want a Windows shell presented
to the users, not a BASH shell.

If I installed a UNIX shell tool
on your UNIX box, how would you react
if you got a VMS shell or a TANDEM shell
when you ran it??

Should I expect you to learn VMS ot TANDEM to use
a UNIX tool? ... I think not.

Pure Personal Opinion.

Bill

then you should love telnet, or better be fighting to get an ssh server
installed. if an ssh server came bundled you could get yer beloved c:>
remotely and securely.

 

[David Candy]

Use the right tool. VBS, JS, bat, or Group Policy.

 

[David Candy]

We do anyway. It's called Terminal Server.

 

[ews]

We do anyway. It's called Terminal Server.

uh.. that wouldnt be cli.

 

[David Candy]

It is once you type cmd in Start Run.

 

[Al Dunbar [MS-MVP]]

ever try to implement a perl script that needs to run locally on 1000
workstations, who dont have perl installed? with an IT dept of 6 and no
software mgmt tools,

Problem 1: no tools, solution 1: get some.

going out to each workstation to install an
interpreter is absurd. how hard would it really be to just include it?

Perhaps not that hard for that one particular tool. But one of the
complaints that some people have against Windows is that you get a whole lot
of stuff you don't need. OK, so they add Perl and Bash. Then someone
complains that something else is missing...

windows media player comes bundled on server versions of windows for
christs sake.

Technically, I do not think that that is the actual reason wmp is bundled,
but then, I do not now how religious the folks at Microsoft are.

tell me whats more useful.

That depends. On a server, both are of little interest to me, and I'll bet
that there are people out there (shudder) running wmp on servers who have
never even heard of Perl. So the question is: useful to whom?

/Al

 

[David Candy]

If one supports server over the phone then one like to run server. But as a workstation. Server makes a great multiuser workstation. It's how Pro should work. As I gave up non computer CDs players years ago I need computers to play CDs.

 

[ews]

If one supports server over the phone then one like to run server. But as a workstation. Server makes a great multiuser workstation. It's how Pro should work. As I gave up non computer CDs players years ago I need computers to play CDs.

im talking about real production environments where server operating
systems are used on machines providing services to the network. not
emulating a server environment to help with probs. wmp is not needed on
a server. i think that was your point.

 

[ews]

It is once you type cmd in Start Run.

uh.. no its not. but thats ok, im taking it you work helpdesk.

 

[ews]

Problem 1: no tools, solution 1: get some.

good point! and 'some' should be perl and ssh.
that should actually read; no tools? include some.

Perhaps not that hard for that one particular tool. But one of the
complaints that some people have against Windows is that you get a whole lot
of stuff you don't need. OK, so they add Perl and Bash. Then someone
complains that something else is missing...

thatd be because lots of tools are missing from windows. but lets start
with the basics. included are: two text editors, one web browser, one
desktop window manager, no hardworking cli, two interpreters (cmd.exe,
wsh/cscript), no ssh client, no decent packet dumpers, etc.

i have a bad feeling this is turning into a windows bashing thread.. i
really didnt intend to start anything like this.

also, im not so concerned about bash not being ported to windows. i
think that was mentioned by someone else a few threads up.. while i do
love bash, the fact that its missing from windows is not really a prob.

Technically, I do not think that that is the actual reason wmp is bundled,
but then, I do not now how religious the folks at Microsoft are.

if religious means 'makes decisions in the best interest of their
products longevity and their competitors demise at the cost of
usability, security, and stability'. then, microsoft is the holy land.

That depends. On a server, both are of little interest to me, and I'll bet
that there are people out there (shudder) running wmp on servers who have
never even heard of Perl. So the question is: useful to whom?

im thinking those are the ppl working help desk and windows server phone
support. nothing against those guys, i worked phone support for many
years as well. its just a server running on a desktop for consistency
with the customer is not the same as a server running in a farm
supporting databases, applications, and directory services.

im not a anti ms zealot and am in fact an mcse 3 times over. just
thought id see how everyone else feels about some of the tools missing
from windows.

 

[David Candy]

Servers are locked in cupboards. One uses logon scripts for clients (and if it's me it will be vbs).

 

[David Candy]

Nothing makes you go to the start menu and start it. I don't listen to music very often (once a month) but if I did I don't see why I can't play a CD at an overnight maintence thing.

 

[ews]

Nothing makes you go to the start menu and start it. I don't listen to music very often (once a month) but if I did I don't see why I can't play a CD at an overnight maintence thing.

if you only use it once a month, why bother having the buggy vulnerable
app on the machine at all. do you really have speakers plugged into your
server and does it really require maintenance once a month? hrm. i
suspect your problems are greater than having wmp. are you even sure
what perl and ssh do?

this is getting way off topic.

p.s. exploit code doesnt require you to go to start->run to take
advantage of an applications flaws.