Re: [Cooker] basesystem should not require vim
Le 2002.08.04 11:49, huug a écrit : > Today, Richard Burt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Another bug! Using evolution, when I clicked on the licks at the > > bottom of Nora's email, nothing happened. I am using Galeon for www > > You could try Galeon's build-in Mail & News client, nee Mozilla > Messenger . Be > forwarned though that it's ssllooww... Funny ! I didn't know that each mozilla component could be accessed in galeon with this kind or url... Bertrand Dekoninck
Re: [Cooker] basesystem should not require vim
On 20020804 Philippe Coulonges wrote: > > This post has a wrong title. It should be called Agreed. But I would like to say something more. Don't ever think on 'should not require vim'. Basesystem must have vi. Period. After agreement on this, you can spent the rest of your life talking about what _ELSE_ a newbie would need, and choose a tiny, small, editor to add. But look at _ADD_, not substitute. Any admin would be annoyed if vi is not there. You can blame whatever you want the cryptic keys of vi, but after learning a dozen keystrokes, you can beat anyone in speed and reliability using vim. -- J.A. Magallon \ Software is like sex: junk.able.es \ It's better when it's free Mandrake Linux release 9.0 (Cooker) for i586 Linux 2.4.19-jam0 (gcc 3.2 (Mandrake Linux 9.0 3.2-0.2mdk))
Re: [Cooker] basesystem should not require vim
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Le Samedi 03 Août 2002 23:11, Igor Izyumin a écrit : > On Saturday 03 August 2002 12:33 pm, huug wrote: > > That's not the issue. There needs to be a small editor in /bin for > > emergency repairs, and newbees are more likely to cause > > such. This post has a wrong title. It should be called "Newbies should not have access to root password" This way, they will not mess with their system, and will not need any baby-sitter editor in /bin. > > Besides, old hacks surely can put their vi|emacs there > > themselfs: that's not something a distro maker has to do for them. You clearly don't understand. If our newbie with root password has crashed his distro in a way he can't load /usr I'm one of the guys he will call to clear the mess. If he took a Unix course somewhere he certainly had learn about vi (I do learn it when I give formations). If he doesn't know this, I prefer to let him without any mean to do more damages. Even Emacs gurus know that vi is THE editor you can always expect on any Unix. Sometimes you get only tiny, sometimes vim. You curse tiny, but you can bring back your system with it. Any system. > How about both? Scalable man says "basesystem is too big already, get grub out". > Is there really not enough room for another small editor? Script it in on your systems. You'll have it for life. No three months reinstall here. > I completely agree with you: Mandrake is a newbie-oriented distributions No, Mandrake is general-oriented distribution, newbies included. > and very few newbies know how to use VI. Ask for a locale of the vim tutorial or submit it. > It looks like the author of the > rant never had to help someone fix their lilo.conf or do some repair over > the phone. Try explaining how to use VI to a newbie... Before or after he learned the names of the keys ? > Hell, I've been > using Linux for 3-something years now and the only editor I know how to use > is Pico. I can make some emergency repairs with VI, but it really ticks me > off. Think to script. CU CPHIL - -- Selon la mécanique quantique, il n'est pas possible, même en principe, d'en savoir assez sur le présent pour proposer une prédiction complète du futur. -- Heisenberg -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE9TGu4YJwqltj/jHgRApUkAJ44wMPWV8mzPfBIzA378ZZjvzO0eACdHbi8 oUf0gEDrkdGNjic9hPlVyYU= =iXqm -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [Cooker] basesystem should not require vim
Another bug! Using evolution, when I clicked on the licks at the bottom of Nora's email, nothing happened. I am using Galeon for www On Sat, 2002-08-03 at 23:48, Nora Etukudo wrote: > On Sat, Aug 03, 2002 at 05:20:53PM +0200, huug wrote: > > > > Emacs is far too large, and joe/nano are far less known than vi. > > > > Nano is as well known as pico and one doesn't have to know it to be > > able to use it which is exactly why it should replace vi|emacs in > > /root). > > Well, I've about 25 years experience in using and administering UNIX > machines. I've never heard of 'joe' or 'nano' and until now I thought > 'pico' was a composer for mail messages within 'pine' but not an editor. > > 'vim' or at least any 'vi'-compatible editor ist standard for all > flavors of UNIX systems. > > Liebe Grüße, Nora. > -- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > IM-NETZ Neue Medien, Berlin http://www.im-netz.de/ > WWW von Frauen für Frauen, Hamburghttp://www.w4w.net/ > Lesbian Computer Networks, Helsinki http://www.sappho.net/ > > -- > Virus scanned by edNET. -- Richard Burt PC Support Services (Scotland) 11a Lauderdale Street Edinburgh EH9 1DF T: 07950 401 570 F: 07950 400 081 W: www.pc-support.uk.com E: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Virus scanned by edNET.
Re: [Cooker] basesystem should not require vim
On Sat, Aug 03, 2002 at 05:20:53PM +0200, huug wrote: > > Emacs is far too large, and joe/nano are far less known than vi. > > Nano is as well known as pico and one doesn't have to know it to be > able to use it which is exactly why it should replace vi|emacs in > /root). Well, I've about 25 years experience in using and administering UNIX machines. I've never heard of 'joe' or 'nano' and until now I thought 'pico' was a composer for mail messages within 'pine' but not an editor. 'vim' or at least any 'vi'-compatible editor ist standard for all flavors of UNIX systems. Liebe Grüße, Nora. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] IM-NETZ Neue Medien, Berlin http://www.im-netz.de/ WWW von Frauen für Frauen, Hamburghttp://www.w4w.net/ Lesbian Computer Networks, Helsinki http://www.sappho.net/
Re: [Cooker] basesystem should not require vim
On Saturday 03 August 2002 12:33 pm, huug wrote: > Well, pico can't be included due to licensing problems. Which is why > nano was born. Why is it included in the 8.2 then? > That's not the issue. There needs to be a small editor in /bin for > emergency repairs, and newbees are more likely to cause > such. Besides, old hacks surely can put their vi|emacs there > themselfs: that's not something a distro maker has to do for them. How about both? Is there really not enough room for another small editor? I completely agree with you: Mandrake is a newbie-oriented distributions and very few newbies know how to use VI. It looks like the author of the rant never had to help someone fix their lilo.conf or do some repair over the phone. Try explaining how to use VI to a newbie... Hell, I've been using Linux for 3-something years now and the only editor I know how to use is Pico. I can make some emergency repairs with VI, but it really ticks me off. -- -- Igor
Re: [Cooker] basesystem should not require vim
On Saturdayen den 3 August 2002 19.33, huug wrote: > Well, pico can't be included due to licensing problems. Which is why > nano was born. It could "Provides: pico", and also have a softlink "ln -s nano pico" I checked out "floppyfw" the other day and I think they used a "Micro Editor", u3d or something... Could that be something as it's really small and is pico/nano like? -- Regards // Oden Eriksson Deserve-IT Networks -> http://d-srv.com
Re: [Cooker] basesystem should not require vim
On Saturday 03 August 2002 11:20, huug wrote: >Nano is as well known as pico and one doesn't have to know it to be >able to use it which is exactly why it should replace vi|emacs in >/root). First, until this debate began recently, I was unaware of Nano, but had used pico (as a part of pine) for many years, so to say it is as well known as pico may be overstating nano's notoriety. [rant] If people want to use their computer without knowing anything about it, there is always "the leading competitor." Playing around at a superuser command prompt is not for the inexperienced. vi/vim et al. are tools for the superuser, or at least for the experienced user. Novices will start out in the relative comfort of their window manager with it's fluffy, shiny, candy-like buttons and "are you sure, dearest?" dialogue boxes, and _slowly_ venture bit by bit into the belly of the beast that it Linux. While they are safely within the coddling womb of X, they can browse documentation, and pick up on how to use vi by using vim-X11, and if they never get the hang of it, they probably won't be doing much venturing out into the stark, cold blackness of a virtual console, either, for it will frighten them. If the argument is that a newbie may have trouble installing his system, and might need to manually conduct feats of UNIX-wizzardry, I can only laugh. If the person is capable of that, he isn't a newbie, and can probably use man to figure out how to use rpm to install whatever editor he well pleases. If Mandrake is to be for the new-to-UNIX user, then it is for the rest of us, who have some experience, to install and test it on any kind of system we can get our hands on to find the problems before the newbie has a chance to find them on his own, the hard way. Nano is nice, and for those who wish to use it in the administration of their machines, I say: "very well, install and use it as you will, but I will keep with vi/vim, thank-you." [/rant] -Chuck -- +-% He's a real UNIX Man $-+-+ \ Sitting in his UNIX LAN \ Charles A. Shirley \ \ Making all his UNIX plans \ cashirley (at) comcast (dot) net \ +--# For nobody @--+-+
Re: [Cooker] basesystem should not require vim
Borsenkow Andrej <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Emacs is far too large, and joe/nano are far less known than vi. > > > > It is not the point as far as I understand. If somebody prefers emacs > and has installed emacs there is no reason to force him to have vi (the > same for any other editor). Installer can still prefer vi over any other > editor if you find it more sensible. The point is having an editor in / especially for people having a separate /usr, it needs to not be too large and to be known. -- Guillaume Cottenceau - http://people.mandrakesoft.com/~gc/
RE: [Cooker] basesystem should not require vim
> > "Michal 'hramrach' Suchanek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > I think emacs/joe/nano would do as well. > > In debian there is feature sensible-text-editor which is provided by > > packages that supply visual text editor for console. > > Emacs is far too large, and joe/nano are far less known than vi. > It is not the point as far as I understand. If somebody prefers emacs and has installed emacs there is no reason to force him to have vi (the same for any other editor). Installer can still prefer vi over any other editor if you find it more sensible. -andrej
Re: [Cooker] basesystem should not require vim
"Michal 'hramrach' Suchanek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I think emacs/joe/nano would do as well. > In debian there is feature sensible-text-editor which is provided by > packages that supply visual text editor for console. Emacs is far too large, and joe/nano are far less known than vi. -- Guillaume Cottenceau - http://people.mandrakesoft.com/~gc/
