"bcs" <b...@example.com> wrote in message news:jhonpv$neg$1...@digitalmars.com... > On 02/18/2012 09:10 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote: >> >> I've heard a lot of people say that about vi(m), but in my (admittedly >> somewhat limited) experience, I've never come across a (Li|U)n[ui]x >> system >> that didn't have nano or pico (neither of which are great, but they're >> good >> enough for editing Unix configuration files, and I'm actually capable of >> using them, unlike emacs or vim). > > Vi's not that hard to use if you don't expect to be a power user. >
I figure I could probably get by with it (if I had to) as long as I grabbed a command reference and kept it nearby. But so far, I haven't felt any need or desire to do so. >> >> But I prefer to do it like this: SSH into a server, but then also connect >> via SSHFS (SSHFS is fucking *awesome*!). That way, no matter the server, >> I >> can use *any* editor I want: kate, gedit, whatever. > > How long does it take to get in via sshfs? If it take more than about 10 > seconds to get started, that is a non-starter for some cases Same speed as any normal SSH login. Only difference is instead of doing: $ssh user@domain You do: $sshfs user@domain: /desired/local/mount/point Or if you don't want it rooted on the remote user's home dir: $sshfs user@domain:/ /desired/local/mount/point # the whole damn remote system or $sshfs user@domain:/remote/dir /desired/local/mount/point Then to logout, it's just: $fusermount -u /desired/local/mount/point It literally is SSH, so the actual login process is exactly the same as SSH, whether you use a key-pair or a full login/pass. So however fast that is, that's how fast SSHFS is. I've never noticed any difference.
