From: Melbourne, Australia
Registered: 2011-10-20
Posts: 1,066
Website
(Maybe this should go in "Try This"?)
Hello Archers,
I was thinking about software that sucks, as considered at All software sucks and Software that sucks less. I wondered whether it would be possible to measure the "suckiness" or maybe (conversely) the "Unixness" of a system. The essential idea is that if four small programs can do the same job as a single much larger program, then we should prefer the ecosystem of smaller programs, and consider this ecosystem more Unix-like.
This is similar to ideas about model-selection as used in statistics, where it's preferred to use simpler models; in particular it occurred to me that an entropy-like calculation could provide a quick-and-dirty way to measure unixness. In what follows, don't expect much rigour. It's just a bit of fun, partially justified by reference to notions from information theory.
Let's proceed by considering measure theoretic entropy and define X to be the concatenation of all executable files on your system. Clearly, X forms a set in which the elements are bytes defined by an address together with a value between 0x00 and 0xFF. The executable files now form a partition Q of X. Since everything is finite and discrete, Q in turn induces a sigma-algebra, so we have a measurable space.
To make the measurable space into a true measure space, we need a measure. In the naive just-for-fun calculation I'm getting to, it's sufficient to assume that the best measure to use is: what proportion of X is taken up by the file f? I.e., if S(B) refers to the size S of any set of bytes B, we shall use the measure
p(f) := S(f)/S(X)
Now that we have a proper measure space, we can proceed directly to invoking measure theoretic entropy, mentioned earlier. In particular, we now define the unixness contributed by a file f as,
H(f) := -p(f)log(p(f))
where the logarithm is base 2. To calculate the unixness of multiple files, add their individual contributions.
Thus, we can approximate the unixness of an entire system by running the following pair of commands:
T=$(sudo find {,/usr}/{{s,}bin,lib} /usr/include /boot /etc -type f ! -empty -printf "%s\n" | awk '{t+=$1} END {print t}')
sudo find {,/usr}/{{s,}bin,lib} /usr/include /boot /etc -type f ! -empty -printf "%s\n" | awk -v t=$T '{p=$1/t; h += -p*log(p)/log(2)} END {print h}'
The first command calculates S(X), the size of the set of executable files X. The second command adds the unixness contributions from the individual files. The division by log 2 in the second statement is just a scale factor to change awk's natural logarithm to a binary logarithm.
The sudo is required so that "find" can extract file-sizes from sensitive directories. The code will still work if you don't use sudo, you'll just get permission warnings. (These can be ignored with a "2>/dev/null".)
Clearly, if the entire system is driven by a single monolithic executable, you'll get a unixness of 0.
When I run the code, I get:
8.09131
Last edited by /dev/zero (2012-03-05 5:16 pm)
DSFR: Do Some Frickin' Research
Linux is NOT Windows | The Rootless Root
Desktop: Phenom II X6 1090T CPU, 4Gb RAM, ArchLinux, dwm.
Laptop: i5-2430M CPU, 4Gb RAM, BCM43227 wifi, ArchLinux, wmii.
Offline
Report Quote
#22012-03-03 5:51 pm
.:B:.
Forum Fellow

Registered: 2006-11-26
Posts: 5,818
Email
As an aside: is the sudo really necessary?
Got Leenucks? :: Arch: Power in simplicity :: Get Counted! Registered Linux User #392717 :: Blog thingy
Offline
Report Quote
#32012-03-03 5:51 pm
jasonwryan
Administrator

From: .nz
Registered: 2009-05-09
Posts: 5,966
Email Website
I have no idea what this means, but it sounds interesting...
Arch Netbook
7.50275 10.6669
Arch Desktop (with bloatware for my better half's account)
7.70631 10.7082
Debian Stable Server
8.13658 10.2989
eh?
# edit: if these results were reversed it would make a lot more sense to me
# edit2: updated with new metric
Last edited by jasonwryan (2012-03-06 12:55 am)
Arch + dwm   •   Mercurial repos
Registered Linux User #482438
Online
Report Quote
#42012-03-03 5:52 pm
/dev/zero
Member

From: Melbourne, Australia
Registered: 2011-10-20
Posts: 1,066
Website
.:B:. wrote:
As an aside: is the sudo really necessary?
I have a note about the sudo a bit below the commands ...
DSFR: Do Some Frickin' Research
Linux is NOT Windows | The Rootless Root
Desktop: Phenom II X6 1090T CPU, 4Gb RAM, ArchLinux, dwm.
Laptop: i5-2430M CPU, 4Gb RAM, BCM43227 wifi, ArchLinux, wmii.
Offline
Report Quote
#52012-03-03 5:54 pm
.:B:.
Forum Fellow

Registered: 2006-11-26
Posts: 5,818
Email
Bah. And I thought I had read it twice .
Got Leenucks? :: Arch: Power in simplicity :: Get Counted! Registered Linux User #392717 :: Blog thingy
Offline
Report Quote
#62012-03-03 6:07 pm
/dev/zero
Member

From: Melbourne, Australia
Registered: 2011-10-20
Posts: 1,066
Website
.:B:. wrote:
Bah. And I thought I had read it twice .
I've split the note about sudo into a separate paragraph. This should make it easier to see.
DSFR: Do Some Frickin' Research
Linux is NOT Windows | The Rootless Root
Desktop: Phenom II X6 1090T CPU, 4Gb RAM, ArchLinux, dwm.
Laptop: i5-2430M CPU, 4Gb RAM, BCM43227 wifi, ArchLinux, wmii.
Offline
Report Quote
#72012-03-03 6:13 pm
skunktrader
Member
From: Brisbane, Australia
Registered: 2010-02-14
Posts: 1,182
8.36644
Offline
Report Quote
#82012-03-03 6:56 pm
ambientzoo
Member

From: UK
Registered: 2011-08-02
Posts: 58
Email
7.82848
Stephen
Offline
Report Quote
#92012-03-03 7:32 pm
Kaustic
Member
Registered: 2011-08-18
Posts: 503
Email
-nan
(Do I win anything?)
NaOH
Offline
Report Quote
#102012-03-03 7:35 pm
egan
Member
From: Mountain View, CA
Registered: 2009-08-16
Posts: 264
Email
7.36535
GitHub
Offline
Report Quote
#112012-03-03 8:07 pm
/dev/zero
Member

From: Melbourne, Australia
Registered: 2011-10-20
Posts: 1,066
Website
Kaustic wrote:
-nan
(Do I win anything?)
lol, wtf? Maybe you have one really small file so the log went too close to zero thanks to round-off?
Kaustic wins!
What do you get in your "T"?
Last edited by /dev/zero (2012-03-03 8:09 pm)
DSFR: Do Some Frickin' Research
Linux is NOT Windows | The Rootless Root
Desktop: Phenom II X6 1090T CPU, 4Gb RAM, ArchLinux, dwm.
Laptop: i5-2430M CPU, 4Gb RAM, BCM43227 wifi, ArchLinux, wmii.
Offline
Report Quote
#122012-03-03 8:12 pm
KingX
Member

From: Fremont, CA
Registered: 2010-03-23
Posts: 309
7.80924
So is 10 impossible to have? And 7-8 about the ideal for a system?
Offline
Report Quote
#132012-03-03 8:13 pm
bohoomil
Member
Registered: 2010-09-03
Posts: 1,183
Email Website
/dev/zero wrote:
Kaustic wrote:
-nan
(Do I win anything?)
Kaustic wins!
Is obviously cheating. Must be a *BSD user...
My one:
7.86591
(whatever it means...).
Edit: after adding $HOME/bin with circa 140 scripts:
7.91417
Last edited by bohoomil (2012-03-04 9:01 am)
Registered Linux User: 223384
Ultimate, Infinality font config
Offline
Report Quote
#142012-03-03 8:24 pm
hadrons123
Member

From: chennai
Registered: 2011-10-07
Posts: 834
Email
8.28108
Like others I don't really have any clue what /dev/zero is saying.
Last edited by hadrons123 (2012-03-03 8:25 pm)
DELL E1505: C2D | 4GB | 320GBHDD | ATIX1400 | Fedora
ACER 5740:INTEL DUAL CORE| 2 GB | 160GB | Archlinux, Scientific Linux
Unix is user-friendly. It just isn't promiscuous about which users it's friendly with. - Steven King
Offline
Report Quote
#152012-03-03 8:34 pm
/dev/zero
Member

From: Melbourne, Australia
Registered: 2011-10-20
Posts: 1,066
Website
KingX wrote:
So is 10 impossible to have? And 7-8 about the ideal for a system?
10 isn't impossible to have. Depending on the total size of all executables you have installed, I don't think there's an upper bound. Eg, if all your files are the same size, then your score will go up as the logarithm of the number of executables you have installed.
As for interpretation, I think it's sort of a relative thing: the point is to compare your scores to other people's scores. If most people are getting between 7.5 and 8.5, and you don't sit inside that range, then there's probably something unusual about your system. If you get a low score, that might indicate that you tend to use fewer, larger programs, that is, programs which "suck more"; and if you have a high score, that probably shows you prefer programs that "suck less" .
It would be interesting to see the scores associated with various LiveCDs. Unfortunately, I can't do this myself at the second.
Last edited by /dev/zero (2012-03-03 8:41 pm)
DSFR: Do Some Frickin' Research
Linux is NOT Windows | The Rootless Root
Desktop: Phenom II X6 1090T CPU, 4Gb RAM, ArchLinux, dwm.
Laptop: i5-2430M CPU, 4Gb RAM, BCM43227 wifi, ArchLinux, wmii.
Offline
Report Quote
#162012-03-03 9:30 pm
KingX
Member

From: Fremont, CA
Registered: 2010-03-23
Posts: 309
Ah ok I thought the score was based on a scale of  1-10, 1 being extremely sucky and 10 being the least sucky.
Offline
Report Quote
#172012-03-04 1:14 am
ngoonee
Forum Moderator

From: Between Thailand and Singapore
Registered: 2009-03-17
Posts: 6,298
Email
8.33448
I'm surprised, I thought my system was less UNIX-y than most (firefox, for example). Of course, I DO use awesome and mutt (but also have evolution and thunderbird installed....)
Allan-Volunteer on the (topic being discussed) mailn lists. You never get the people who matters attention on the forums.
jasonwryan-Installing Arch is a measure of your literacy. Maintaining Arch is a measure of your diligence. Contributing to Arch is a measure of your competence.
Griemak-Bleeding edge, not bleeding flat. Edge denotes falls will occur from time to time. Bring your own parachute.
Offline
Report Quote
#182012-03-04 1:46 am
ploub
Member

Registered: 2007-05-16
Posts: 102
Email
heh.
8.48594
Offline
Report Quote
#192012-03-04 2:05 am
bernarcher
Forum Moderator

From: Germany
Registered: 2009-02-17
Posts: 2,150
Email
8.40162 here.
Almost top value so far. (ploub did beat me, however.  )
Also moving this thread to Try This. It does fit better there.
To know or not to know ...
... the questions remain forever.
Offline
Report Quote
#202012-03-04 2:35 am
ga01f4733
Member

From: bcn, Catalonia
Registered: 2008-12-05
Posts: 117
Email
7.77387
New metrics- 10.9418
Last edited by ga01f4733 (2012-03-06 2:16 am)
There are no foreign lands. It is the traveler only who is foreign. --R.L Stevenson
Offline
Report Quote
#212012-03-04 2:40 am
Barthalion
Trusted User (TU)
From: Poland, Szczecin
Registered: 2010-02-26
Posts: 69
Email Website
Desktop: 8.05751
VPS:        7.5757
Uff.
Arch Linux - rolling release distro, where people are wanting to downgrade to a previous version
Offline
Report Quote
#222012-03-04 2:42 am
ViruSzZ
Member

From: The Streets
Registered: 2010-10-14
Posts: 194
Email Website
7.19486 on my linux-vServer based vps.
Their Momma Made Em, Their Momma Gave em & now she can`t even SAVE`em | My WebLog
Offline
Report Quote
#232012-03-04 2:48 am
freek
Member

From: the Netherlands
Registered: 2008-07-21
Posts: 33
Email Website
Debian testing: 7.2328
there's no business like .. your own business
Offline
Report Quote
#242012-03-04 2:49 am
Gcool
Member

Registered: 2011-08-16
Posts: 1,345
Email
Workstation at work (not running Arch): 9.48663
Burninate! | github
Offline
Report Quote
#252012-03-04 2:56 am
Pajaro
Member
Registered: 2004-04-21
Posts: 854
Email
(8.73086) new metric -> 12.1293 ...having installed kde and xfce and lxde and openoffice and everything that i can think of. (1685 packages installed).
Last edited by Pajaro (2012-03-13 10:03 am)
Offline
Report Quote
#262012-03-04 3:21 am
Bellum
Member
Registered: 2011-08-24
Posts: 230
Email
8.09135
Not gonna lie, no idea what that means. Some of my stuff is small and modular (urxvt, fluxbox, vim, luakit, tmux). But some more monolithic (firerfox, thunderbird, vlc, kile, wine). Honestly even though I use fluxbox I probably have half of both KDE and Gnome installed because of dependencies.
Offline
Report Quote
#272012-03-04 3:47 am
livibetter
Member

From: Taipei
Registered: 2008-05-14
Posts: 90
Email Website
I got 7.87855 on Gentoo.
My math is rusty and I don't understand the theory, but I am curious about this special case (though impossible in real world): A system has n files of exactly same filesize s.
If my math is still working, then
S(f)=s
S(X)=n*s
p(f)=s/(n*s)=1/n
H(f)=-1/n*log(1/n)=1/n*log(n)
unixness=n*H(f)=log(n)
the filesize is out of the equation in the unixness, only the number of files affect the unixness.
What does that mean?
Offline
Report Quote
#282012-03-04 4:50 am
toad
Member

From: if only I knew
Registered: 2008-12-22
Posts: 1,770
Email Website
8.79174
never trust a toad...
::Grateful ArchDonor::
::Grateful Wikipedia Donor::
Offline
Report Quote
#292012-03-04 5:11 am
San2ban
Banned
From: Bangalore, India
Registered: 2010-02-09
Posts: 258
Email
8.09943
Surprised!. I will remove some bloat and try again
Satyam eva jayate
Registered linux user #535257
Offline
Report Quote
#302012-03-04 5:35 am
Awebb
Member

Registered: 2010-05-06
Posts: 1,613
Email
7.80966 (Arch desktop)
7.93163 (Arch HTPC)
This numbers benefit 32bit systems (smaller binaries). Does that mean 64-bit systems suck more?
EDIT: By the way... that "All software sucks" guy is a boring troll. He should redesign the site to look more like a blog, because static pages tend to be recieved as "truth and knowledge", while oppinions can be found in blogs :-D
Last edited by Awebb (2012-03-04 5:37 am)
Reinstalling Arch is not normal. On --force it is. --force, not even once.
Offline
Report Quote
#312012-03-04 5:56 am
hadrons123
Member

From: chennai
Registered: 2011-10-07
Posts: 834
Email
Looks like guys using OS other than Arch are scoring higher.
DELL E1505: C2D | 4GB | 320GBHDD | ATIX1400 | Fedora
ACER 5740:INTEL DUAL CORE| 2 GB | 160GB | Archlinux, Scientific Linux
Unix is user-friendly. It just isn't promiscuous about which users it's friendly with. - Steven King
Offline
Report Quote
#322012-03-04 6:13 am
Kaustic
Member
Registered: 2011-08-18
Posts: 503
Email
/dev/zero wrote:
What do you get in your "T"?
A rather large number: 276902333
Heh, I did try to add that in manually but it always produced not a number. I've tried it under Zsh and Bash in both a script and simply copy pasting into the terminal
NaOH
Offline
Report Quote
#332012-03-04 6:30 am
SS4
Member

From: !Rochford, Essex
Registered: 2010-12-05
Posts: 693
8.13925
Not bad
Rauchen verboten
Offline
Report Quote
#342012-03-04 7:22 am
Pajaro
Member
Registered: 2004-04-21
Posts: 854
Email
San2ban wrote:
8.09943
Surprised!. I will remove some bloat and try again
I am overbloated and got a 8.73; try the opposite
Offline
Report Quote
#352012-03-04 7:42 am
Blµb
Member
Registered: 2008-02-10
Posts: 174
(a) 8.38748
(b) 8.39183
(b) Includes my ~/bin which contains a set of scripts to ease my life. And cbmc, a huge binary, actually a statistical outlier even, since it's 4.6M.
How about taking a look at binaries and scripts seperately? Since scripts, for example, lack all the ELF format overhead their executing binaries have...
root@blubpc ~ # cat > /tmp/filter.sh << EOF
#!/bin/sh
if head "\$1" | grep -q '^#!'; then
  stat -c '%s' "\$1"
	else
	  stat -c '%s' "\$1" >&2
		fi
		EOF
		root@blubpc ~ # chmod +x /tmp/filter.sh
		root@blubpc ~ # find {,/usr}/{s,}bin /lib /boot /etc /home/blub/bin -type f -executable -exec /tmp/filter.sh '{}' "%s" ';' > /tmp/filtered_scripts 2> /tmp/filtered_bins
		root@blubpc ~ # T1=$(cat /tmp/filtered_bins | awk '{t+=$1} END {print t}')
		root@blubpc ~ # T2=$(cat /tmp/filtered_scripts | awk '{t+=$1} END {print t}')
		root@blubpc ~ # echo $T1 $T2
		868139304 30871849
		root@blubpc ~ # cat /tmp/filtered_bins | awk -v t=$T1 '{p=$1/t; h += -p*log(p)/log(2)} END {print h}'
		8.25136
		root@blubpc ~ # cat /tmp/filtered_scripts | awk -v t=$T2 '{p=$1/t; h += -p*log(p)/log(2)} END {print h}'
		6.06017
		root@blubpc ~ # echo sanity check, the following should equal b=8.39183
		sanity check, the following should equal b=8.39183
		root@blubpc ~ # cat /tmp/filtered_bins /tmp/filtered_scripts | awk -v t=$[T1 + T2] '{p=$1/t; h += -p*log(p)/log(2)} END {print h}'
		8.39183
		root@blubpc ~ # cat /tmp/filtered_bins | awk -v t=$[T1 + T2] '{p=$1/t; h += -p*log(p)/log(2)} END {print h}'
		8.01669
		root@blubpc ~ # cat /tmp/filtered_scripts | awk -v t=$[T1 + T2] '{p=$1/t; h += -p*log(p)/log(2)} END {print h}'
		0.375133
		Not really what I was expecting O.o
		You know you're paranoid when you start thinking random letters while typing a password.
		A good post about vim
		Python has no multithreading.
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#362012-03-04 8:40 am
		azleifel
		Member
		From: St Evenage, UK
		Registered: 2007-10-28
		Posts: 475
		Email
		8.72211
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#372012-03-04 8:46 am
		GordonGR
		Member

		From: Thessaloniki, Greece
		Registered: 2011-11-07
		Posts: 162
		Email
		8.62069, and I am using KDE.
		Intel(R) Celeron(R) CPU E3400 @ 2.60GHz, 1878 MB, XFCE 4.10, x86_64. AURs.
		“No one without the knowledge of geometry may enter.“ Plato.
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#382012-03-04 9:07 am
		stressat
		Member

		From: Romania
		Registered: 2010-10-10
		Posts: 55
		Email Website
		8.70095 (kde 4.8)
		http://stressat.blogspot.com/
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#392012-03-04 9:48 am
		kinhodder
		Member

		From: UK
		Registered: 2010-04-18
		Posts: 65
		Email Website
		7.99342
		Seems reasonable. I think.
		weblog | dotfiles
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#402012-03-04 10:07 am
		kevku
		Member
		From: Estonia
		Registered: 2009-11-21
		Posts: 51
		Email
		8.61058 arch kde
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#412012-03-04 10:23 am
		Teho
		Member

		Registered: 2010-01-30
		Posts: 195
		Email
		8.17453 - Arch Linux | KDE
		HP Elitebook 8560w | Arch Linux | KDE
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#422012-03-04 10:45 am
		igndenok
		Member
		From: Sidoarjo, Indonesia
		Registered: 2010-06-07
		Posts: 153
		Email
		8.32163
		ArchLinux & awesome
		Ask, and it shall be given you.
		Seek, and ye shall find.
		Knock, and it shall be opened unto you.
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#432012-03-04 11:32 am
		jac
		Member

		From: /home/jac
		Registered: 2009-05-19
		Posts: 427
		Email Website
		This is an interesting concept. Though, it appears to me that your metric is flawed. It does not measure the UNIX-ness very well at all. I mean, take a look at the formula. It only takes into account the relative size. That means that a system with 10 highly UNIX-y programs which are all the same size gets the exact same score as a system with 10 monolithic programs which are each the same size.
		With that in mind, I'm not really sure of a good way to correct it. I would think a term dependent on the absolute size only would be needed, but I haven't had time to play around with it yet. Maybe adding in something like 1/S(f) ? As long as you have no zero-byte files (which is probably the case for the person getting NaN) this should not blow up.
		I know it's all in fun and not very rigorous, but it would just be a lot cooler to me if it was tweaked to be a little better
		Last edited by jac (2012-03-04 11:35 am)
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#442012-03-04 12:30 pm
		stlarch
		Member

		From: hell
		Registered: 2010-12-25
		Posts: 1,186
		Email
		6.66666
		configs
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#452012-03-04 1:10 pm
		firecat53
		Member

		From: Sammamish, Wa
		Registered: 2007-05-13
		Posts: 1,063
		Email
		8.11125. 64-bit laptop w/ dwm (+ firefox, virtualbox, libreoffice).
		Scott
		Screenshots :: Github
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#462012-03-04 3:57 pm
		scjudd
		Member

		Registered: 2010-08-18
		Posts: 14
		Email
		8.21373
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#472012-03-04 4:34 pm
		RobbieWT
		Member
		Registered: 2011-04-14
		Posts: 21
		Email
		8.48478
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#482012-03-04 4:45 pm
		toad
		Member

		From: if only I knew
		Registered: 2008-12-22
		Posts: 1,770
		Email Website
		And my desktop says 9.00682
		EDIT:
		new value 12.0578
		Last edited by toad (2012-03-10 2:09 am)
		never trust a toad...
		::Grateful ArchDonor::
		::Grateful Wikipedia Donor::
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#492012-03-04 4:54 pm
		Hubi17
		Member
		Registered: 2009-07-04
		Posts: 16
		Email
		7.99593
		using awesome wm - I guess I have some bloat
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#502012-03-04 5:10 pm
		AaronD
		Member
		From: Tosev 3
		Registered: 2009-01-26
		Posts: 29
		Email
		8.50055 on my Arch laptop with KDE 4.8.
		--Aaron
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#512012-03-04 5:21 pm
		Gusar
		Member
		Registered: 2009-08-25
		Posts: 2,473
		Email
		Hubi17 wrote:
		7.99593
		using awesome wm - I guess I have some bloat
		Considering you get under 8, and folks with KDE get almost 9, I'd say rather than you having bloat the metric is just very, very flawed.
		I get 8.05345 on my desktop. Which is completely weird, as I could swear that when I tried on my laptop earlier in the day it was under 8. And, get this, it's the *exact* same install on both machines. Seriously. The differences are minimal, a few config files are a bit different, that's it. The packages installed are the same.
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#522012-03-05 12:35 am
		/dev/zero
		Member

		From: Melbourne, Australia
		Registered: 2011-10-20
		Posts: 1,066
		Website
		Gusar wrote:
		Considering you get under 8, and folks with KDE get almost 9, I'd say rather than you having bloat the metric is just very, very flawed.
		It occurs to me that since it's only counting executables, and since KDE and the like is mainly small apps built around large libraries (are they not?), this might be leading to the inaccurate results.
		When I remove the "-executable" flag, my own score suddenly leaps to "nan".
		DSFR: Do Some Frickin' Research
		Linux is NOT Windows | The Rootless Root
		Desktop: Phenom II X6 1090T CPU, 4Gb RAM, ArchLinux, dwm.
		Laptop: i5-2430M CPU, 4Gb RAM, BCM43227 wifi, ArchLinux, wmii.
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#532012-03-05 12:56 am
		livibetter
		Member

		From: Taipei
		Registered: 2008-05-14
		Posts: 90
		Email Website
		/dev/zero wrote:
		When I remove the "-executable" flag, my own score suddenly leaps to "nan".
		I think that is caused by files with no content, i.e. 0 bytes.
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#542012-03-05 1:12 am
		/dev/zero
		Member

		From: Melbourne, Australia
		Registered: 2011-10-20
		Posts: 1,066
		Website
		livibetter wrote:
		I think that is caused by files with no content, i.e. 0 bytes.
		Aha. Okay, when I filter out all the size zeros (grep -v "^0"), I now get 8.90591.
		DSFR: Do Some Frickin' Research
		Linux is NOT Windows | The Rootless Root
		Desktop: Phenom II X6 1090T CPU, 4Gb RAM, ArchLinux, dwm.
		Laptop: i5-2430M CPU, 4Gb RAM, BCM43227 wifi, ArchLinux, wmii.
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#552012-03-05 2:34 am
		Ari'osika
		Member

		From: Your computer, okay?
		Registered: 2010-06-22
		Posts: 152
		Email
		8.09657
		Whatever that actually means.. haha
		If you're reading this; you're awesome.
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#562012-03-05 12:22 pm
		Blµb
		Member
		Registered: 2008-02-10
		Posts: 174
		We do need to find a way to fix the fact that scripts are usually much smaller than binaries... Whereas scripts can also be non-unix-y
		Maybe add the size of some of the shell's segments to the script sizes?
		Last edited by Blµb (2012-03-05 12:22 pm)
		You know you're paranoid when you start thinking random letters while typing a password.
		A good post about vim
		Python has no multithreading.
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#572012-03-05 1:01 pm
		alphaniner
		Member

		From: Ancapistan
		Registered: 2010-07-12
		Posts: 907
		Email
		Arch: 9.56345
		Ubuntu 10.04 Server: 11.9539
		Voting is an act of presumptive violence because each voter assumes the right to appoint a political guardian over other human beings.
		People choosing more satisfying, lower paying jobs over less satisfying, higher paying jobs costs the government millions of dollars in tax revenue each year. Close the happiness tax-loophole!
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#582012-03-05 1:21 pm
		Hspasta
		Member
		Registered: 2011-12-23
		Posts: 109
		Email
		I'm getting an error when I run the first command. I assume you just copy and paste right?
		T=$(sudo find {,/usr}/{s,}bin /lib /boot /etc -type f ! -empty -printf "%s\n" awk '{t+=$1} END {print t}')
		find: paths must precede expression: awk
		Usage: find [-H] [-L] [-P] [-Olevel] [-D help|tree|search|stat|rates|opt|exec] [path...] [expression]
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#592012-03-05 1:47 pm
		/dev/zero
		Member

		From: Melbourne, Australia
		Registered: 2011-10-20
		Posts: 1,066
		Website
		Hspasta wrote:
		I'm getting an error when I run the first command. I assume you just copy and paste right?
		T=$(sudo find {,/usr}/{s,}bin /lib /boot /etc -type f ! -empty -printf "%s\n" awk '{t+=$1} END {print t}')
		find: paths must precede expression: awk
		Usage: find [-H] [-L] [-P] [-Olevel] [-D help|tree|search|stat|rates|opt|exec] [path...] [expression]
		Apologies. I edited the original post to incorporate some feedback, and removed the pipe sign. It should work now.
		DSFR: Do Some Frickin' Research
		Linux is NOT Windows | The Rootless Root
		Desktop: Phenom II X6 1090T CPU, 4Gb RAM, ArchLinux, dwm.
		Laptop: i5-2430M CPU, 4Gb RAM, BCM43227 wifi, ArchLinux, wmii.
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#602012-03-05 1:54 pm
		/dev/zero
		Member

		From: Melbourne, Australia
		Registered: 2011-10-20
		Posts: 1,066
		Website
		Blµb wrote:
		We do need to find a way to fix the fact that scripts are usually much smaller than binaries... Whereas scripts can also be non-unix-y
		Maybe add the size of some of the shell's segments to the script sizes?
		I see what you're saying; however, the commands already count your shell's binaries (/bin/bash ...), and it is good unix practice to prefer scripts to binaries; furthermore, your suggested work-around would over-complicate what's essentially just meant to be a fun heuristic.
		DSFR: Do Some Frickin' Research
		Linux is NOT Windows | The Rootless Root
		Desktop: Phenom II X6 1090T CPU, 4Gb RAM, ArchLinux, dwm.
		Laptop: i5-2430M CPU, 4Gb RAM, BCM43227 wifi, ArchLinux, wmii.
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#612012-03-05 3:19 pm
		skanky
		Member

		From: Sheffield
		Registered: 2009-10-23
		Posts: 1,146
		Email
		EDIT new version : 11.4123
		Last edited by skanky (2012-03-06 5:15 am)
		"...one cannot be angry when one looks at a penguin."  - John Ruskin
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#622012-03-05 3:39 pm
		Zeqadious
		Member
		From: New York, USA
		Registered: 2007-10-15
		Posts: 54
		Email Website
		Arch: 10.0595
		Last edited by Zeqadious (2012-03-05 3:43 pm)
		"Till shade is gone, till water is gone, into the Shadow with teeth bared, screaming defiance with the last breath, to spit in Sightblinder's eye on the Last Day"
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#632012-03-05 3:52 pm
		Hspasta
		Member
		Registered: 2011-12-23
		Posts: 109
		Email
		Arch: 9.10433
		I wanted to get a better score so I did some package cleanup and it went up by 0.3.
		Last edited by Hspasta (2012-03-05 3:54 pm)
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#642012-03-05 4:10 pm
		frostyfrog
		Member
		From: Utah, USA
		Registered: 2011-03-27
		Posts: 31
		Email
		Hspasta wrote:
		Arch: 9.10433
		I wanted to get a better score so I did some package cleanup and it went up by 0.3.
		Now I'm kind of afraid to do the same...
		Arch server: 9.5723
		Arch Netbook: 8.85845
		Funny, I was pretty sure my netbook had more "bloat" on it than my server...
		{arch32} {subtlewm}{Acer Aspire One AO532h}
		{arch64} {Headless Server}
		Grrr! 400 char limit
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#652012-03-05 4:53 pm
		vwyodajl
		Member

		Registered: 2012-01-21
		Posts: 156
		Email
		Laptop Arch 9.58941, I don't feel that bloated
		EDIT:3/6/12
		Now with recent changes made in OP
		11.2063
		Last edited by vwyodajl (2012-03-06 3:48 am)
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#662012-03-05 5:12 pm
		/dev/zero
		Member

		From: Melbourne, Australia
		Registered: 2011-10-20
		Posts: 1,066
		Website
		Note that this isn't really about "bloat" per se. The idea is that you will score better if, given say a 10Mb file, you can replace it with several files whose sizes add to 10Mb. Optimal unixness comes from having programs that are functionally orthogonal and which act as text filters. It's kind of independent of how large these functionally-orthogonal text filters are.
		DSFR: Do Some Frickin' Research
		Linux is NOT Windows | The Rootless Root
		Desktop: Phenom II X6 1090T CPU, 4Gb RAM, ArchLinux, dwm.
		Laptop: i5-2430M CPU, 4Gb RAM, BCM43227 wifi, ArchLinux, wmii.
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#672012-03-05 5:38 pm
		Kaustic
		Member
		Registered: 2011-08-18
		Posts: 503
		Email
		Good news /dev/zero! Your new command worked. Here is my new score: (old score: -nan)
		11.3115
		Do I win anything... again?
		Last edited by Kaustic (2012-03-05 5:48 pm)
		NaOH
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#682012-03-05 5:43 pm
		/dev/zero
		Member

		From: Melbourne, Australia
		Registered: 2011-10-20
		Posts: 1,066
		Website
		Kaustic wrote:
		Now, do I win anything... again?
		Close, but no cigar. With the updated command, I'm now on 11.471 .
		DSFR: Do Some Frickin' Research
		Linux is NOT Windows | The Rootless Root
		Desktop: Phenom II X6 1090T CPU, 4Gb RAM, ArchLinux, dwm.
		Laptop: i5-2430M CPU, 4Gb RAM, BCM43227 wifi, ArchLinux, wmii.
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#692012-03-05 5:51 pm
		Kaustic
		Member
		Registered: 2011-08-18
		Posts: 503
		Email
		Balls.
		So essentially the higher the result the more, smaller, executables you have and getting lower results for having fewer, larger executables?
		Last edited by Kaustic (2012-03-05 5:52 pm)
		NaOH
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#702012-03-05 5:54 pm
		n1x4
		Member

		From: Chernobyl
		Registered: 2012-02-17
		Posts: 141
		Email Website
		11.2407
		||github||
		Hack-N-Slash
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#712012-03-05 5:56 pm
		/dev/zero
		Member

		From: Melbourne, Australia
		Registered: 2011-10-20
		Posts: 1,066
		Website
		Kaustic wrote:
		Balls.
		So essentially the higher the result the more, smaller, executables, you have and getting lower results for having fewer, larger executables?
		Yep.
		... always keeping in mind that there's nothing rigorous here. You can (assuming write access) increase your score to any arbitrary value that you feel like, by running for sufficiently long:
		while true; do echo 1 > /bin/$RANDOM; done
		DSFR: Do Some Frickin' Research
		Linux is NOT Windows | The Rootless Root
		Desktop: Phenom II X6 1090T CPU, 4Gb RAM, ArchLinux, dwm.
		Laptop: i5-2430M CPU, 4Gb RAM, BCM43227 wifi, ArchLinux, wmii.
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#722012-03-05 7:13 pm
		hellbuster
		Member
		From: Chile
		Registered: 2010-05-17
		Posts: 14
		Email
		11.5583
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#732012-03-05 8:50 pm
		Bellum
		Member
		Registered: 2011-08-24
		Posts: 230
		Email
		Hum. I don't know. I installed Scribus and Inkskape today and I've still got you beat /dev/zero.
		Then again, I've also installed pekwm and tint2.
		11.8462
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#742012-03-05 9:43 pm
		ANOKNUSA
		Member

		From: Minneapolis, MN, USA
		Registered: 2010-10-21
		Posts: 1,098
		Email
		/dev/zero/ wrote:
		As for interpretation, I think it's sort of a relative thing: the point is to compare your scores to other people's scores. If most people are getting between 7.5 and 8.5, and you don't sit inside that range, then there's probably something unusual about your system. If you get a low score, that might indicate that you tend to use fewer, larger programs, that is, programs which "suck more"; and if you have a high score, that probably shows you prefer programs that "suck less"
		Hm... 11.3251.
		You sure about that? 'Cuz I seem to recall sucking" quite a bit more.   The only WM I've got installed right now is WMFS2; a couple weeks ago, my score would've been different.  This is interesting, albeit in a just-for-fun sort of way; I'm not sure there's much we can tell about each other's set-ups just by looking at this single number.
		You read it--you can't UNread it!!!
		"Oh, Skycake... Why must you be so delicious?"  --Patton Oswalt
		Offline
		Report Quote
		#752012-03-05 9:52 pm
		Gusar
		Member
		Registered: 2009-08-25
		Posts: 2,473
		Email
		The metric has changed since that post was written. Now it seems 11 is sort of the middle point.
		Offline
		Report Quote
		Pages: 1 2 NextPost reply
		Index» Try This» Measure your system's UnixnessSubscribe to this topic
		Quick post
		Write your message and submit

		BBCode: on [url] tag: on [img] tag: on Smilies: on

		 Jump to

				Atom topic feed
				Powered by FluxBB

From: Melbourne, Australia
Registered: 2011-10-20
Posts: 1,066
Website
Gusar wrote:
The metric has changed since that post was written. Now it seems 11 is sort of the middle point.
Yeah, sorry about that. The commands evolved a little bit based on the discussion.
DSFR: Do Some Frickin' Research
Linux is NOT Windows | The Rootless Root
Desktop: Phenom II X6 1090T CPU, 4Gb RAM, ArchLinux, dwm.
Laptop: i5-2430M CPU, 4Gb RAM, BCM43227 wifi, ArchLinux, wmii.
Offline
Report Quote
#772012-03-10 12:23 am
disastrophe
Member

From: pdx
Registered: 2010-10-08
Posts: 90
Email
11.5904 -- arch, xfce
"If we believe absurdities, we shall commit atrocities." ~ Voltaire
Offline
Report Quote
#782012-03-10 1:28 am
bananas4370
Member

From: Warwick QLD Australia
Registered: 2011-10-25
Posts: 23
Email
I get 10.9931
Cheers
Patrick
Linux Counter: #478369
Don't fix it if it ain't broken, don't break it if you can't fix it.
Offline
Report Quote
#792012-03-10 1:52 am
SiD
Member

From: Germany
Registered: 2006-09-21
Posts: 729
Email
11.3156
"To start press any key." Where's the any key? - Homer Simpson
Offline
Report Quote
#802012-03-10 3:18 am
ViruSzZ
Member

From: The Streets
Registered: 2010-10-14
Posts: 194
Email Website
The result of my arch+gnome3 lappy = 10.788
Their Momma Made Em, Their Momma Gave em & now she can`t even SAVE`em | My WebLog
Offline
Report Quote
#812012-03-10 6:38 pm
freek
Member

From: the Netherlands
Registered: 2008-07-21
Posts: 33
Email Website
OK, new metric .. Debian testing: 10.4784
there's no business like .. your own business
Offline
Report Quote
#822012-03-10 10:23 pm
iv597
Member
From: United States
Registered: 2011-09-18
Posts: 51
Email Website
My box:
11.2489
Yeah. I kinda figured it'd be pretty high for me, I purposefully use light software.
EDIT... oh, apparently this isn't high anymore. Whatevs.
Last edited by iv597 (2012-03-10 10:24 pm)
Website (Including Blog, Code, OA Server) :: iv597 on Freenode, OFTC, Twitter, identi.ca
Offline
Report Quote
#832012-03-11 6:27 am
Ragnis
Member

Registered: 2012-01-29
Posts: 14
Email Website
11.2167
Offline
Report Quote
#842012-03-11 6:39 am
portix
Member
Registered: 2009-01-13
Posts: 563
Email
desktop: 10.6551
notebook: 10.482
dwb
Offline
Report Quote
#852012-03-11 11:56 am
szorti
Member
From: Cracow, Poland
Registered: 2010-06-23
Posts: 18
Email
11.8127 with gnome 3
Offline
Report Quote
#862012-03-12 3:59 pm
Hspasta
Member
Registered: 2011-12-23
Posts: 109
Email
Hspasta wrote:
Arch: 9.10433
I wanted to get a better score so I did some package cleanup and it went up by 0.3.
New metric: 11.5807
Offline
Report Quote
#872012-03-12 4:32 pm
debsuvra
Member
From: India
Registered: 2008-08-07
Posts: 11
Email Website
11.1819 with GNOME 3 and Arch 64 bit. I use multiple scientific calculation software like Mathematica/MATLAB/Octave etc, coupled with standard browser, media player and usual GNOME stuffs.
Offline
Report Quote
#882012-03-12 4:59 pm
jgreen1tc
Member

From: St. Louis
Registered: 2011-05-15
Posts: 185
Email
10.7441
Pretty cool. I'm not exactly sure what that means, but I like my set-up.
Offline
Report Quote
#892012-03-13 3:54 am
RaisedFist
Member

From: Romania
Registered: 2007-01-30
Posts: 551
Website
I'm 11.2629 unixy
last.fm
Offline
Report Quote
#902012-03-17 8:24 pm
X1650
Member

Registered: 2012-02-25
Posts: 1
Email
Desktop: 9.42851
Laptop: 10.2546
Interesting.
Offline
Report Quote
#912012-04-13 10:53 am
adamrehard
Member

From: NY, USA
Registered: 2011-11-02
Posts: 154
Email
11.3217
So it has come to this.
http://xkcd.com/1022/
"The box said requires Vista or better, so I installed Arch"
Windows != Linux
Offline
Report Quote
#922012-04-17 1:38 pm
Sara
Member

From: USA
Registered: 2009-07-08
Posts: 197
Website
11.1627, on a cli-only setup on a laptop. I really enjoyed the attempt at making this all mathematically rigorous .
Registed Linux User 483618
Offline
Report Quote
#932012-04-17 2:25 pm
nabeelimran
Member

From: Swat, Pakistan
Registered: 2012-02-09
Posts: 26
Email
11.2271 !!!
Arch Linux with GNOME Fallback.
...should I be worried or something?
Dell XPS M1710 : C2D 2.16 - 4GB - 320GB - 256MB nVidia - 17" TFT - DVD-DL-RW
Triple-Boot: Windows 7 Ultimate - Arch Linux x86_64 GNOME (MAIN) - Ubuntu 10.04.3
Offline
Report Quote
#942012-04-17 2:32 pm
/dev/zero
Member

From: Melbourne, Australia
Registered: 2011-10-20
Posts: 1,066
Website
Sara wrote:
11.1627, on a cli-only setup on a laptop. I really enjoyed the attempt at making this all mathematically rigorous .
o_O Are you being sarcastic? Any real mathematician/statistician would smack me upside the head lol
DSFR: Do Some Frickin' Research
Linux is NOT Windows | The Rootless Root
Desktop: Phenom II X6 1090T CPU, 4Gb RAM, ArchLinux, dwm.
Laptop: i5-2430M CPU, 4Gb RAM, BCM43227 wifi, ArchLinux, wmii.
Offline
Report Quote
#952012-04-17 2:44 pm
/dev/zero
Member

From: Melbourne, Australia
Registered: 2011-10-20
Posts: 1,066
Website
nabeelimran wrote:
11.2271 !!!
Arch Linux with GNOME Fallback.
...should I be worried or something?
What about? It's a reasonable number. I'm currently around 11.8924.
I saw it dip a couple of times when I installed Firefox and Uzbl; libreoffice pushed it up. This seems a little counterintuitve. I think it's because uzbl depends on libwebkit, and puts most of its little files in /usr/share (not counted by unixness), whereas libreoffice did put a lot of little files in /usr/lib (which is counted).
DSFR: Do Some Frickin' Research
Linux is NOT Windows | The Rootless Root
Desktop: Phenom II X6 1090T CPU, 4Gb RAM, ArchLinux, dwm.
Laptop: i5-2430M CPU, 4Gb RAM, BCM43227 wifi, ArchLinux, wmii.
Offline
Report Quote
#962012-04-18 2:06 am
GERGE
Member
From: Turkey
Registered: 2008-09-29
Posts: 157
Email Website
Xfce
10.89
Offline
Report Quote
#972012-04-18 12:50 pm
trontonic
Trusted User (TU)
Registered: 2008-07-21
Posts: 80
On my desktop computer used for testing and building all sorts of packages: 12.6766
Offline
Report Quote
#982012-04-20 2:27 pm
Sara
Member

From: USA
Registered: 2009-07-08
Posts: 197
Website
/dev/zero wrote:
o_O Are you being sarcastic? Any real mathematician/statistician would smack me upside the head lol
I probably would have been seriously annoyed if I had already taken measure theory, but as I've only heard of the terms, I thought it fun how you attempted to appear rigorous . So no, no sarcasm.
Registed Linux User 483618
Offline
Report Quote
#992012-04-20 3:55 pm
Terra-byte
Member
Registered: 2012-03-25
Posts: 11
Email
11.8266
Offline
Report Quote
#1002012-04-20 7:32 pm
manzdagratiano
Member

From: New Jersey, USA
Registered: 2010-10-08
Posts: 131
Email
11.659...
And I still have Gnome installed! I should mention I am compulsive about removing bloat otherwise, but nonetheless,  my score must have been helped by my massive sage install, which has many small files.
EDIT: Nope, not at all, since sage is located in $HOME, and therefore not counted by Unixness. I guess I should feel naturally Unixy.
Last edited by manzdagratiano (2012-04-21 10:25 am)
Be formless, shapeless... like water. Now you put water into a cup, it becomes the cup; you put water into a bottle it becomes the bottle; if you put it in a teapot it becomes the teapot... Now water can flow, or it can crash... Be water my friend
Offline
Report Quote
#1012012-04-20 8:07 pm
Misfit138
Misfit Emeritus

From: USA
Registered: 2006-11-26
Posts: 4,157
Email Website
Fedora 16 on ThinkPad T60: 12.0032
Arch on Desktop: 11.7531
In 2011, a Professor of Computer Science gave a speech on using the Linux kernel to teach his undergraduates about operating systems. Someone in the audience asked, "Why use Linux? Why not use Plan 9?" He answered, "Plan 9 looks like it was written by experts; Linux looks like something my students could aspire to write."
Offline
Report Quote
#1022012-04-21 2:31 am
onearm
Member

From: Anywhere but here
Registered: 2006-07-06
Posts: 354
Email
Arch (64bit): 10.116
Arch (32bit, very minimal installation): 9.14239
To get something done, a committee should consist of no more than three persons, two of them absent.
--
Twitter Github
Offline
Report Quote
#1032012-04-30 11:35 am
gruby
Member
Registered: 2012-04-30
Posts: 1
Email
hello
12.8232
Offline
Report Quote
#1042012-04-30 12:23 pm
kuraku
Member

From: planet Earth
Registered: 2012-01-03
Posts: 152
Email
9.96677
Hmmm, seems okay for a debian sid machine with just a few programs and monsterwm.
Last edited by kuraku (2012-04-30 12:26 pm)
Offline
Report Quote
#1052012-04-30 5:02 pm
Jristz
Member

From: America/Santiago
Registered: 2011-06-10
Posts: 372
Email
11.4442
xfce4 4.10 and only all that I need
Offline
Report Quote
#1062012-05-01 11:00 am
ShadowKyogre
Member

From: Hell! XP No... I'm not telling
Registered: 2008-12-19
Posts: 424
Website
Got this on my desktop with KDE: 12.0314
Will probably edit later to include stats for my laptop.
For every problem, there is a solution that is:
Clean
Simple and most of all...wrong!
Github page
Offline
Report Quote
#1072012-05-01 7:03 pm
mrmylanman
Member
From: Altamonte Springs, FL, USA
Registered: 2011-03-13
Posts: 175
Email
My laptop which has XFCE got 11.0648.  Kind of surprised it is as high as it is.
Arch user since 2011-03-13
Thinkpad X220 Intel Core i7-2640M CPU, 16GB DDR3-1333 RAM, 160GB Intel SATA II SSD & 60GB OCZ mSATA SSD, 12.5" IPS 1366x768 Display, 6-cell Battery
(Installation date:  2012-03-19)
Offline
Report Quote
#1082012-05-01 9:39 pm
Roken
Member

From: UK
Registered: 2012-01-16
Posts: 354
Email Website
I have no clue what I did - but a quick check before copy & paste suggested it wasn't going to kill my system:
11.7211
Arch, Debian, LFS
ATI Radeon HD 6670, 2GB, AMD Phenom II X4 (965BE) @ 3.6 Ghz (Overclocked) 8GB RAM
Linux user #545703
Offline
Report Quote
#1092012-05-01 10:05 pm
Montague
Member

From: :age
Registered: 2010-06-24
Posts: 82
11.7254 amazingly, I had no idea my system would be so Unix-y, I made no special efforts (have basic gnome installed but don't use it much, I also have Compiz-standalone, but I mostly log in to lxde or xfce4) so yeah a bunch of crud installed that I could clean up, and I am sure my system must "suck" in many ways, but hey, nice result nonetheless (not that this "test" means much anything at all).
 o   — ǝƃɐnƃuɐʃ ǝʌıʇɐu ʎɯ ʇou sı ɥsıʃƃuǝ
 o7o
 ///
 Offline
 Report Quote
 #1102012-05-02 11:07 pm
 zero2cx
 Member

 From: Minneapolis, MN
 Registered: 2012-04-29
 Posts: 16
 Email
 11.6522 The big old brick under my desk.
 Hehee, I like it. I just don't know why.
 Signature
 Offline
 Report Quote
 #1112012-05-03 4:58 am
 Gruntz
 Member
 From: Haskovo, Bulgaria
 Registered: 2007-08-31
 Posts: 250
 Email
 11.4943

 is higher better then lower number?
 Offline
 Report Quote
 #1122012-05-03 5:41 am
 /dev/zero
 Member

 From: Melbourne, Australia
 Registered: 2011-10-20
 Posts: 1,066
 Website
 Gruntz wrote:
 11.4943

 is higher better then lower number?
 Well, there are a few issues with making broad judgements about better or worse.
 Issue #1: there are real problems with the measure's implementation. For example, it's easy to score higher just by installing more software, whether or not you use that software. Ideally, it should only count software that you actually use. It has other problems too. Please just treat it only as a bit of fun!
 Issue #2: it's intended to be a measure of Unixness, according to traditional notions of what this means. Is being true to the Unix tradition good or bad? I personally prefer high Unixness, but I didn't write the opening post intending to make anyone feel bad.
 Issue #3: the idea of basing the measure on entropy is also possibly problematic. I seem to recall seeing precedent, in other contexts, for a measure like this, but even so, I must emphasise to only treat this in a light-hearted way.
 TLDR? Okay, higher is probably better, more or less
 DSFR: Do Some Frickin' Research
 Linux is NOT Windows | The Rootless Root
 Desktop: Phenom II X6 1090T CPU, 4Gb RAM, ArchLinux, dwm.
 Laptop: i5-2430M CPU, 4Gb RAM, BCM43227 wifi, ArchLinux, wmii.
 Offline
 Report Quote
 #1132012-05-04 12:56 am
 durian
 Member
 Registered: 2011-12-22
 Posts: 13
 Email
 Arch 64 bit, my work machine, with Openbox:
 10.2827
 -peter
 Offline
 Report Quote
 #1142012-05-06 3:23 pm
 Yurlungur
 Member

 From: USA
 Registered: 2012-01-05
 Posts: 115
 Email
 11.4698 on my Arch laptop with xmonad.
 My score is probably skewed because my path includes all the scripts I wrote for work.
 Actually, I was wondering about the measure... I've never seen a quotient measure before and it seemed a bit wonky. I would have thought something more reliable would be a difference measure?  Of course, if we did that, we couldn't use entropy, and the number of microstates per macrostate makes a fair amount of sense to me for unixi-ness... so there you go.
 Thanks for this fun little idea, /dev/zero.
 Last edited by Yurlungur (2012-05-06 3:25 pm)
 Lenovo Thinkpad T420; Intel sandy bridge i7 2.7GHz; integrated graphics card; 4GB RAM; wifi; Arch; Xmonad WM
 Offline
 Report Quote
 #1152012-05-06 5:49 pm
 baronmax
 Member
 From: Missouri, USA
 Registered: 2012-04-22
 Posts: 29
 Email
 11.6897 = laptop (Arch + awn/compiz and about 8 other DE/WMs)
 11.4196 = desktop 1  (Arch awn/compiz, rather slim system...or so I thought)
 11.7071 = desktop 2 (Ubuntu...soon to be Arch...bloated as all hell, as is typical with ubuntuuuuuuu)
 I guess that makes me consistent!
 I have no clue what it means, but there ya go.
 Last edited by baronmax (2012-05-06 5:59 pm)
 Intel 980x| 6GB RAM| Arch + Openbox
 Intel 2600K| 8GB RAM| Arch + AWN/Compiz
 Intel Q740| 6GB RAM| Arch + AWN/Compiz
 AMD Phenom x6 1090T| Ubuntu/Winblowz (gaming)
 Offline
 Report Quote
 #116Today 4:58 am
 theblazehen
 Member
 Registered: 2012-12-05
 Posts: 3
 Email
 11.6684
 Offline
 Report Quote
 #117Today 5:21 am
 illusionist
 Member

 From: localhost
 Registered: 2012-04-03
 Posts: 317
 Email
 Arch 64 bit: 10.8442
 People are usually more convinced by reasons they discovered themselves than by those found by others. -Blaise Pascal
 @github
 Offline
 Report Quote
 #118Today 1:41 pm
 MrCode
 Member

 Registered: 2010-02-05
 Posts: 259
 Email
 Lappy: 11.2859
 I have yet to test my desktop, but it should be very similar, as it has most of the same software.
 Offline
 Report Quote
 #119Today 2:40 pm
 chris_l
 Member
 Registered: 2010-12-01
 Posts: 152
 Email
 11.9959.
 Reading seems it used to be about 8 the average, but now is 10 to 11 the average... means arch has now more unixness?
 My system is updated btw.
 "open source is about choice"
 No.
 Open source is about opening the source code complying with this conditions, period. The ability to choose among several packages is just a nice side effect.
 Offline
 Report Quote
 #120Today 4:31 pm
 MrCode
 Member

 Registered: 2010-02-05
 Posts: 259
 Email
 Reading seems it used to be about 8 the average, but now is 10 to 11 the average... means arch has now more unixness?
 The script has been changed; it now uses a different metric for measuring "Unicity".
 Offline
 Report Quote
 #121Today 5:32 pm
 czubek
 Member

 From: Alliance College
 Registered: 2012-03-08
 Posts: 46
 10.5072
 Arch-ck-atom 64 w/Openbox
 I was hoping for something much lower.
 Perhaps you've heard of me.
 You know all those books, "Such & Such for Idiots"
 I'm the idiot.
 Offline
 Report Quote
 #122Today 5:52 pm
 graysky
 Member

 From: /dev/null
 Registered: 2008-12-01
 Posts: 4,827
 Email Website
 Not sure what to make of this thread, but I'll bite:
 10.3046 on Arch Linux Dual 2012.12.01 (x86_64)
 11.0292 on my workstation
 10.8400 on my laptop
 Pre-compiled & CPU-optimized Linux-ck packages @ Repo-ck.  Enjoy!
 AUR packages  •  .zshrc and other .files on github
 Online
 Report Edit Quote
 #123Today 6:10 pm
 graysky
 Member

 From: /dev/null
 Registered: 2008-12-01
 Posts: 4,827
 Email Website
 Visually inspecting the responsces given in this thread, they range from 2 to 5 decimal places.  If I dump this entire thread to an html file, how can I delete everything except for numbers of these formats:
 x.xx
 x.xxx
 x.xxxx
 x.xxxxx
 xx.xx
 xx.xxx
 xx.xxxx
 xx.xxxxx
 In theory, this would allow me to extract only the results that people posted for a more indepth analysis of the responses.
 EDIT:
 The best I can come up with is not right but does filter down to just numbers:
 % sed 's/[^0-9.]*//g' unixness_thread.txt
 Last edited by graysky (Today 6:13 pm)
 Pre-compiled & CPU-optimized Linux-ck packages @ Repo-ck.  Enjoy!
 AUR packages  •  .zshrc and other .files on github
 Online
 Report Edit Quote
 Pages: Previous 1 2Post reply
 Index» Try This» Measure your system's UnixnessSubscribe to this topic
 Quick post
 Write your message and submit

 BBCode: on [url] tag: on [img] tag: on Smilies: on

	Jump to

		 Atom topic feed
		 Powered by FluxBB