Polytropon free...@edvax.de writes:
When Bill G. arrives at the pearly gate, ol' Pete won't ask
him what he did do, instead send him to MICROS~1 C:\HELL.EXE
with the advice to click on the devil to start the everlasting
pain. :-)
Brilliant!!
atb
Glyn
Daniel Underwood wrote:
How did The question of moving vi to /bin end up as two different
conversations for me in gmail?
Hello Daniel,
When I did a 'Reply to All', the moderator blocked the posting claiming
too high a number of recipients. I cancelled the posting, and resent it
using
-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 16:15:12 -0500
Gary Gatten ggat...@waddell.com wrote:
I like M$ Notepad - is there a version of that for FBSD?
Actually, there is. Wine implements it's own version of notepad
Of RW
Sent: Sunday, June 28, 2009 10:21 PM
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 16:15:12 -0500
Gary Gatten ggat...@waddell.com wrote:
I like M$ Notepad - is there a version of that for FBSD?
Actually, there is. Wine implements it's
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 16:15:12 -0500, Gary Gatten ggat...@waddell.com wrote:
I like M$ Notepad - is there a version of that for FBSD?
You are on the wrong list. Correct your inner state of mind and
try again. :-)
No, seriously: Maybe gnotepad+ appeals to you?
Actually the old edit from dos is
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 22:23:17 -0700, Gary Kline kl...@thought.org wrote:
what about j, k [down, up]. and h,l [left, right]?
why reach over for the arrow keys! oh, and o, and O
[open line below/Above], and
\search
and that's 97 and 44/100ths of what you'll
Hi,
On 26 June 2009 pm 14:01:02 Polytropon wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 22:23:17 -0700, Gary Kline
kl...@thought.org wrote:
have a vi keyboard reference in my extremely important
documentation folder - and yes, it is a real folder, not a
directory. :-) So if everything fails, there's still vi
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 08:01:02AM +0200, Polytropon wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 22:23:17 -0700, Gary Kline kl...@thought.org wrote:
what about j, k [down, up]. and h,l [left, right]?
why reach over for the arrow keys! oh, and o, and O
[open line below/Above], and
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 16:15:12 -0500
Gary Gatten ggat...@waddell.com wrote:
I like M$ Notepad - is there a version of that for FBSD?
Actually, there is. Wine implements it's own version of notepad.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
Hi,
I agree that vi is nowhere as easy to use as ee. Since a lot of people seem to
be happy with ee, why not make it available under /bin so that that there is an
easy-to-use, readily-working editor always available, even if you are in
single-user mode ?
That in fact was the essence of
2009/6/25 Gary Gatten ggat...@waddell.com:
I like M$ Notepad - is there a version of that for FBSD? Actually the old
edit from dos is sweet too
I'll humour you... gedit is similar and better than notepad for BSD,
but there's nothing like 'edit' (actually a stripped down QBasic)
AFAIK.
This whole thread only really got started because I questioned Manish Jain's
assertion that there was no editor available in /bin.
To summarise:
There are several editors available ranging from ed (49604 bytes) and ee
(60920 bytes) (both with two library dependencies) to emacs (in ports;
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 09:59:28AM +0200, Jonathan McKeown wrote:
This whole thread only really got started because I questioned Manish Jain's
assertion that there was no editor available in /bin.
To summarise:
There are several editors available ranging from ed (49604 bytes) and ee
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 15:40:50 +0800, Erich Dollansky er...@apsara.com.sg wrote:
On 26 June 2009 pm 14:01:02 Polytropon wrote:
Maybe this is because vi scared me when using WEGA (which is
the GDR's equivalent of UNIX System III, run on the P8000
was this the russian PDP-11?
I'm not sure if
Hi,
On 27 June 2009 am 07:08:01 Polytropon wrote:
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 15:40:50 +0800, Erich Dollansky
er...@apsara.com.sg wrote:
On 26 June 2009 pm 14:01:02 Polytropon wrote:
Maybe this is because vi scared me when using WEGA (which
is the GDR's equivalent of UNIX System III, run on the
That's a very good suggestion. But let's take into mind that we
do need the most advanced and modern MICROS~1 technology, so
FreeBSD should include a pirated copy of Windows 7 in order
to run the latest and most expensive pirated copy of Office,
programmed in Java, running through Flash. With
Hi,
On 25 June 2009 pm 13:03:01 Manish Jain wrote:
If you want to make a case for replacing ed(1), you're going
to have to come up with some concrete reasons for doing so,
not just make a (long and hyperbolic) statement that you
don't like it.
requirements of being interactive. That's
ed is an interactive program, and it has always been considered as
such, at least since BSD 4.2. Way back then there were three main
editors, ex, vi, and ed.
ed goes back at least as far as the Bell Labs 6th Edition (PDP-11),
where it was the only editor in the distribution. ex and vi (and
John L. Templer wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Manish Jain wrote:
If you want to make a case for replacing ed(1), you're going to have
to come up with some concrete reasons for doing so, not just make a
(long and hyperbolic) statement that you don't like it.
Any Unix
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 01:36:31AM -0400, John L. Templer typed:
ed is an interactive program, and it has always been considered as such,
at least since BSD 4.2. Way back then there were three main editors,
ex, vi, and ed. If you had a nice video terminal then you used vi. But
if you were
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, Manish Jain wrote:
If you want to make a case for replacing ed(1), you're going to have
to come up with some concrete reasons for doing so, not just make a
(long and hyperbolic) statement that you don't like it.
Any Unix tool has to clearly fall either under the
Ruben de Groot wrote:
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 01:36:31AM -0400, John L. Templer typed:
ed is an interactive program, and it has always been considered as such,
at least since BSD 4.2. Way back then there were three main editors,
ex, vi, and ed. If you had a nice video terminal then you used
2009/6/24 Manish Jain invalid.poin...@gmail.com:
everyone has hundreds of GB's
on the disk
No. No they don't. Please hang up and try again. If you need
to make a collect call, please dial zero to speak with an oper-
ator.
--
--
___
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 14:20:42 -0400, ill...@gmail.com ill...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/6/24 Manish Jain invalid.poin...@gmail.com:
everyone has hundreds of GB's
on the disk
No. No they don't. Please hang up and try again. If you need
to make a collect call, please dial zero to speak with an
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 01:28:54PM +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote:
Hi,
On 25 June 2009 pm 13:03:01 Manish Jain wrote:
If you want to make a case for replacing ed(1), you're going
to have to come up with some concrete reasons for doing so,
not just make a (long and hyperbolic) statement
snip
20 years ago, I've written and edited voluminous fortran code on a silly
rs232 terminal using ed. So, it is possible, and one can learn basics of
ed in less than a hour. Don't you think so?
Not when editors like ee and vi are available and more spoken of in
today's topics.
And I know
...@googlemail.com
bf1...@googlemail.com; FreeBSD Mailing List freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Sent: Thu Jun 25 15:50:01 2009
Subject: Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
snip
20 years ago, I've written and edited voluminous fortran code on a silly
rs232 terminal using ed. So, it is possible
Hi,
On 25 June 2009 pm 19:13:14 Konrad Heuer wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, Manish Jain wrote:
Maybe you're right, maybe not.
20 years ago, I've written and edited voluminous fortran code
on a silly rs232 terminal using ed. So, it is possible, and one
I do not believe you. This must have been
Ho,
On 26 June 2009 am 04:32:31 Erik Osterholm wrote:
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 01:28:54PM +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote:
On 25 June 2009 pm 13:03:01 Manish Jain wrote:
If you want to make a case for replacing ed(1), you're
isn't there ee in the base system?
ee is in /usr/bin, just like
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ruben de Groot wrote:
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 01:36:31AM -0400, John L. Templer typed:
ed is an interactive program, and it has always been considered as such,
at least since BSD 4.2. Way back then there were three main editors,
ex, vi, and ed.
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 08:20:19 +0800, Erich Dollansky er...@apsara.com.sg wrote:
On 25 June 2009 pm 19:13:14 Konrad Heuer wrote:
Maybe you're right, maybe not.
20 years ago, I've written and edited voluminous fortran code
on a silly rs232 terminal using ed. So, it is possible, and one
I do not
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 08:24:13 +0800, Erich Dollansky er...@apsara.com.sg wrote:
To be honest, I never have had a problem with /usr since disks are
large enough to have all on only one.
Mostly, partitioning according to directory structures has nothing
to do with disk space, but with intention.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
per...@pluto.rain.com wrote:
ed is an interactive program, and it has always been considered as
such, at least since BSD 4.2. Way back then there were three main
editors, ex, vi, and ed.
ed goes back at least as far as the Bell Labs 6th Edition
Hi,
On 26 June 2009 am 09:06:49 Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 08:20:19 +0800, Erich Dollansky
er...@apsara.com.sg wrote:
On 25 June 2009 pm 19:13:14 Konrad Heuer wrote:
Maybe you're right, maybe not.
20 years ago, I've written and edited voluminous fortran
code on a
Hi,
On 26 June 2009 am 09:07:00 Polytropon wrote:
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 08:24:13 +0800, Erich Dollansky
er...@apsara.com.sg wrote:
To be honest, I never have had a problem with /usr since
disks are large enough to have all on only one.
Mostly, partitioning according to directory structures
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 09:50:31 +0800, Erich Dollansky er...@apsara.com.sg wrote:
On 26 June 2009 am 09:06:49 Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
As far as 16 years back, VT220/VT320 terminals were in wide use
in universities. Some of us learned our first regexp stuff by
not only there, but ed was not the
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 09:55:48 +0800, Erich Dollansky er...@apsara.com.sg wrote:
this is not what I mean. I wanted to say, as long as the boot disk
come up, I also have /usr available when I have the space to have
it all on the same disk.
I see. The fact that /usr isn't available after booting
Hi,
On 26 June 2009 am 10:02:30 Polytropon wrote:
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 09:55:48 +0800, Erich Dollansky
er...@apsara.com.sg wrote:
this is not what I mean. I wanted to say, as long as the boot
disk come up, I also have /usr available when I have the
space to have it all on the same disk.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 09:50:31AM +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote:
Hi,
On 26 June 2009 am 09:06:49 Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 08:20:19 +0800, Erich Dollansky
er...@apsara.com.sg wrote:
On 25 June 2009 pm 19:13:14 Konrad Heuer wrote:
Maybe you're right, maybe not.
Hi,
On 26 June 2009 pm 12:19:32 Gary Kline wrote:
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 09:50:31AM +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote:
On 26 June 2009 am 09:06:49 Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 08:20:19 +0800, Erich Dollansky
er...@apsara.com.sg wrote:
On 25 June 2009 pm 19:13:14 Konrad
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 09:09:56PM -0400, John L. Templer wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
per...@pluto.rain.com wrote:
ed is an interactive program, and it has always been considered as
such, at least since BSD 4.2. Way back then there were three main
editors, ex,
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 12:31:37PM +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote:
Hi,
On 26 June 2009 pm 12:19:32 Gary Kline wrote:
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 09:50:31AM +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote:
On 26 June 2009 am 09:06:49 Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 08:20:19 +0800, Erich
On Tuesday 23 June 2009 15:41:48 Manish Jain wrote:
I hope the next release will address these problems, as well as a pretty
reasonable request from me much earlier to move vi from /usr/bin to
/bin. Even in single-user mode, you almost always need an editor.
Which is why you have ed(1)
On Tuesday 23 June 2009 15:41:48 Manish Jain wrote:
...
About ed first. I might annoy a few people (which would gladden me in
this particular case), but ed was just one of Ken Thompson's nightmares
which he managed to reproduce in Unix with great precision. By no
stretch of imagination would it
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 06:13:49AM -0700, b. f. wrote:
On Tuesday 23 June 2009 15:41:48 Manish Jain wrote:
About ed first. I might annoy a few people (which would gladden me in
this particular case), but ed was just one of Ken Thompson's nightmares
which he managed to reproduce in Unix with
2009/6/24 cpghost cpgh...@cordula.ws:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 06:13:49AM -0700, b. f. wrote:
On Tuesday 23 June 2009 15:41:48 Manish Jain wrote:
About ed first. I might annoy a few people (which would gladden me in
this particular case), but ed was just one of Ken Thompson's nightmares
On Wednesday 24 June 2009 12:59:13 Manish Jain wrote:
About ed first. I might annoy a few people (which would gladden me in
this particular case), but ed was just one of Ken Thompson's nightmares
which he managed to reproduce in Unix with great precision. By no
stretch of imagination would it
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 04:22:19PM +0200, Jonathan McKeown wrote:
You also suggested doing away with ed and /rescue/vi altogether. You may not
need statically-linked tools very often, but when you do need them, you
*REALLY* need them. Don't suggest throwing them away without thinking
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 06:13:49AM -0700, b. f. wrote:
On Tuesday 23 June 2009 15:41:48 Manish Jain wrote:
That's the whole problem of /rescue/vi. When you suddenly find yourself
in single-user mode, the last thing you want to do is realise that
tweaking is needed for something which should
On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 06:13:49 -0700
b. f. bf1...@googlemail.com wrote:
??? Who is giving them that credit? This isn't new. You already have
some control over swapping via several oids:
vm.swap_enabled
vm.disable_swapspace_pageouts
vm.defer_swapspace_pageouts
vm.swap_idle_enabled
If you want to make a case for replacing ed(1), you're going to have
to come up with some concrete reasons for doing so, not just make a
(long and hyperbolic) statement that you don't like it.
Any Unix tool has to clearly fall either under the category of
non-interactive (grep, sed, ex) or
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Manish Jain wrote:
If you want to make a case for replacing ed(1), you're going to have
to come up with some concrete reasons for doing so, not just make a
(long and hyperbolic) statement that you don't like it.
Any Unix tool has to clearly
52 matches
Mail list logo
