Re: cli options

>    I think this meant "And more GUI _wrappers_".  I.E. a GUI for normal 
> command-line utils like 'fdisk' - etc.  [This is to _hide_ the issues behind
> 
> command-line utilities having various swtich standards, like has been 
> discussed with the -o <option list>, -<option>.]

yesyesyes exactly, thank you.

>    Some users are "GUI or nothing" because it's "easy".  Others believe it's
>    
> "command-line or nothing" because "I have to have a way of fixing things if 
> the GUI doesn't work."  Most users are "I just want it to work - why isn't 
> this easy?"

Yup. And "most users" is who define what's hip, and right now it's WindowsXP,
sorry. (Complaints about Windows have significantly lessened with XP, one
should notice.) This is tried-to-be-unaffected, I still like Linux/KDE better.
And wrappers are the best way to go - if the gui fails (ncurses *never* failed
me :) ), I can go tty. all are satisfied.
Unfortunately developers are satisfied with CLI only and people doing gui
wrappers usually don't have as much insight about the internals of the
underlying software as the developer himself. herself. itself.