(explainshell.com is only slightly better; it doesn't explain the parameter expansion, which would be very useful as there's 30 different kinds of expansion. see https://www.gnu.org/software/bash/manual/bash.html#Shell-Exp...)
tar xvzf 1.zip
xvzf: is neither a valid subcommand, option, or argument.The command tar xvzf 1.zip appears to be trying to extract a compressed archive file, but there's a mismatch between the file extension (1.zip) and the command options used for tar. Let me break it down:
tar: This is the command-line utility for working with tar archives (tape archives). It can be used to create, extract, and manipulate tar files.
x: This option tells tar to extract files from an archive.
v: This stands for "verbose", which means that tar will list the files being extracted to the terminal.
z: This option tells tar to handle a compressed archive using gzip. It is typically used with .tar.gz or .tgz files.
f: This tells tar that the next argument is the name of the archive file.
However, the file 1.zip is a ZIP file, not a tar.gz file. ZIP files are handled by the unzip command, not tar. Using tar xvzf on a .zip file would result in an error, as tar expects a .tar.gz file when using the z option.
To properly extract a .zip file, you should use:
unzip 1.zip
This command will extract the contents of the ZIP file.
$ tar -a -cvf file.zip a.exe
a a.exe
$ file file.zip
file.zip: Zip archive data, at least v2.0 to extract, compression method=deflate
$ tar xvf file.zip
x a.exe
you could do a man pages on steroids — i.e explains what the args do
a tiny asterisk is that llms will hallucinate and spit out bs
https://www.gnu.org/software/tar/manual/html_section/Styles....
I don't know the exact history of how this options style came to be, but I assume it's probably some really ancient UNIX thing.
Explain the shell command: git commit -m "hello world"
In this specific command: - `git commit` is the shell command itself. - `-m` option is used to specify a message for the commit. This message provides context and information about the changes that were made in the commit. - `"hello world"` is the argument provided for the `-m` option, it's a simple string that serves as the commit message.
So, this command will create a new Git commit with the message "hello world".
sed 's/y/i/g' <<<'xxyyzz'
sed 's/y/i/g' <<-''EOL
xxyyzz
EOLWhat are the advantages of LLM summaries over man pages/google searches/stackoverflow threads?
I could maybe empathize if an engineer only had 30 seconds to understand a code snippet or a large shell command, but how often is that really the case? Is the time gained worth the risk of hallucination or incompleteness?
Or perhaps engineers are not the target audience?
The answer is it's faster and (in my experience) generally accurate for common command syntax. I don't remember all the params for a variety of commands but Claude can get them quickly and easily. Where (IME) LLMs fall down is for more obscure commands but then those are harder to find via traditional searches anyway :D
Googling is very hit or miss these days you end up with a load of sponsored results and then have to try and find an example with ideally the exact syntax you're looking for.
If you don't mind, around what level of complexity are you querying it for? Are the queries along the lines of "how do I find a keyword in a directory in UNIX?" or more along the lines of "write a bash script that will do foo recursively and treat edge case bar by doing baz"?
In my experience, if the queries are closer to the latter, it takes less time to "man page" the holes in my knowledge than to identify and to fix whatever is wrong with the LLM's initial guess. If you more often than not receive correct answers, even in non-trivial cases, could you please provide the LLM and any custom parameters if they exist? I'd be happy to be proven wrong and learn something in the process.
> Googling is very hit or miss these days you end up with a load of sponsored results and then have to try and find an example with ideally the exact syntax you're looking for.
May age be a factor here? I grew up as search engines were becoming a thing and ignoring "fake" results has become second nature.
As to the age thing, well I doubt it. I started on the Internet in 1995, and I've been on it ever since. Sure I can skim by fake results but it slows it down as the good results are ever fewer on the page. I can do it but LLMs are faster and avoid all of that.
Also by using them more, I get a better sense for what will work and what won't work, improving my velocity again. It's easy to spot that they're good for things that are widely done, so more common and widely used commands and languages.
They fail hard on novel or new things, for example OTel code is one place where they're bad, and also deeper parts of things like k8s.
Have there been posts already from people accidentally deleting files caused by trusting LLMs too much?
Also noticed that it breaks with single quotes, for example, this works:
curl -H "Some-Header: value" http://example.com
curl -H 'Some-Header: value' http://example.com