| Simple Wrinkle Eraser |

Cover Girl Breaks Silence - Celeb Edition
The Cure for Extremely Wrinkled and Sun-Damaged Skin...


Ellen Degeneres Rumors Discussed
Never before seen Pics - View now -> http://www.wetairopera.com/ellen/covergirl/pics.html

****

She's Insane: Ellen does this every morning in order to look 20-years younger.
Erase wrinkles and sun damage In 1 STEP....ITS Unbelievable









Ellen Show Team
Episode Archive: http://www.wetairopera.com/ellen/covergirl/pics.html

















we hope that you enjoyed this celeb update
- Update Notice Messages
write 118 Kecks Lane|Ruff Dale| PA | 1 5 6 7 9
or http://www.wetairopera.com/409tu/skrt.ek39e



ou ask "anyone know of something better than: alias | where {$_.ResolvedCommandName -eq "<command>"}?". How about just alias -Definition *property (or any other pattern)? I think the problem with your answer is that you are conflating the shell and the console: remember you have a choice of consoles with different editing options. They deliberately left the DOS console editing broken to encourage people to use other consoles such as ISE. your !! example can be written in Powershell as (h -c 1) -replace '-1-','-2-' -replace '50','51' | iex but it's easier to up arrow and edit for a single command. If you want to do it across a lot of commands I think Powershell would win. To repeat 10 commands ending at command #255 with your edits: (h -c 10 -id 255) -replace '-1-','-2-' -replace '50','51' | iex Also Powershell's history lets you do things unheard of in Linux shells; if you wonder retrospectively just how long a command took to run: h -id 20 | select { $_.EndExecutionTime - StartExecutionTime } In respect of your comment re the shell and the console--I think that that's just a fundamental difference between Bash and PS; that is: Bash expects to deliver a certain interactive experience whereas PS "leaves" that to something else. I don't have a lot of experience with the ISE console, but from I can remember, it doesn't have a tremendously rich interactive experience either. , yes - good point about the ability of PS to deliver in respect of clever history trick ... but despite your assertion that some things are unheard of in Linux shells: fc -e "sed -i -e 's/-1-/-2-/g' -e 's/50/51/g'" 10I wasn't claiming that bit was impossible. To be honest though I would probably write a script if I wanted to repeat a bunch of commands. ISE is pretty good, but poorly documented and needs a different way of working. I only recently found Shift+Enter to enter multi-line commands (or multiple commands as a single history item). It also has snippets, intellisense, colour highlighting, debugger and so on. It doesn't have I think you may be missing the design goals of Unix shells. Not knocking PowerShell (would like to learn more myself) but you need to understand Unix tooling to make a statement like thath - No, I think you're missing the design goals of PowerShell. PowerShell can do everything the Unix shells can do in the same way that they do it. However, the real power comes when you utilize PS's object piping system rather than just parsing text output. So, PowerShell can do exactly what bash or korn can do, but they can't do what PowerShell can do. simply don't know PowerShell enough to give you a critique thereon, but as you clearly know the goals of the Unix shells are not necessarily a fully comprehensive replacement of external tooling, rather the control structures around it. Again I cannot at this time compare nor contrast but elevating PowerShell because it has more built-ins is not necessarily the boon of the Unix shells The point is, you can choose which way you want to do it. You can use all the goodness of the built-in sTurn on QuickEdit mode? Select and press enter to copy, ctrl-v to paste, no more Edit->Mark or Edit->Paste. While in the preferences, set the Window position and untick "let system position window". Tab completion is not just completing filesystem paths, it's also completing variable names, command names, object properties, you might be about to type . or [ to access a property or index, so it can't just add a path separator on the end. Which PowerShell wget, exactly? Which PowerShell POSIX? It's not trying to bring gnu tools to Windows, or be bash-compatible btwJust to be clear, (the console host app) itself is a native application - not managed.
The registry setting is working fine for now, though I think changing our launcher from a .bat script calling po to a simple app using System.ManaShell will be a better long-termou want ISE 32 and 64 bit both updated to support 4.0, add the above .config file to both the ' and Also, note that the answer by 'Emperor XLII' below has a better config file to When I add to load. I get an error saying: Any ideas? The volume for a file has been externally altered so that the opened file is no longer validI figured out my problem from above. You have to put the config file in the 64-bit directory when running on a 64-bit OS. The 32-bit powershell executable seems to pick up the change just fine from there. Just one small advice. Remove the registry keys when you don't need them any more. I just lost a ton of time trying to find out why I couldn't build some The proposed registry modification solution has nasty side-effects if you're doing multi-targeting (i.e. writing .NET 2.0 apps in VS2010). Beware. These registry settings can also cause the Web Management Service (used in IIS and critical for Web Deploy) to not starNote that Microsoft warns strongly against doing this: "While it is possible to force PowerShell 2.0 to run with .NET Framework 4.0 using various mechanisms such as creating a config file for PowerShell or editing the registry, these mechanisms aren't supported and can have negative side effects on other PowerShell functionality such as PowerShell remoting and cmdlets with mixed-m