Re: minor vi/vim qstn
>> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 10:05:06PM +0200, Polytropon wrote:
P> Depending on _typical_ terminal heights (100 lines?), this [history
P> setting] seems to be a bit high. But I assume zsh handles the "h"
P> alias similarly to the csh, where an alias is defined (system-wide in
P> /etc/csh.cshrc or per user in ~/.cshrc).
The "fc" builtin can be helpful here. I like to see my recent history
without numbering, so I can highlight/rerun/store any useful subset of
commands:
# history without command numbers, look for optional pattern.
h () {
case "$#" in
0) fc -ln 1 | less +G ;;
*) fc -ln 1 | grep ${1+"$@"} ;;
esac
}
If I dork up my history beyond belief, edit and reload the whole thing:
histedit () {
x="$HOME/.histedit"
fc -W $x && vi $x && fc -R $x && rm $x
}
>> In a previous message:
P> % history 20 | awk 'BEGIN {cmds=20} ... | grep -v "history"
You can avoid some history pollution with these settings, at least in
ZSH version 4.3.10:
setopt histignoredups # don't store duplicate lines in command history
setopt histnostore # don't store history commands in history
Other settings I've found useful:
setopt autocd # go to a directory if first word on command line
# is not a command but is a directory
setopt autoresume # single-word commands may resume a suspended job
setopt cdablevars # allows cd'ing to a parameter
setopt correct # try to correct the spelling of commands
setopt csh_junkie_loops # allow short form of loops: list; end
setopt extendedglob # allow # and ^ to be used for filename generation
setopt extended_history # format: ::
setopt globdots # don't require leading . in filename to be matched
setopt ignoreeof# don't logout using Control-D
setopt longlistjobs # list jobs in long format by default
setopt markdirs # append trailing / to dirnames
setopt menucomplete # cycle through completions when ambiguous
setopt numeric_globsort # sort numeric filenames numerically
setopt noclobber# don't overwrite existing files
setopt notify # tell me when a job finishes
setopt rcquotes # '' = single quote in single-quoted strings
unsetopt bgnice # don't run background jobs at lower priority
--
Karl Vogel I don't speak for the USAF or my company
vogelke at pobox dot com http://www.pobox.com/~vogelke
Teenage girl creates sustainable, renewable algae biofuel under her bed
--Extreme Tech headline, 19 March 2013
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: minor vi/vim qstn
On Thu, 26 Sep 2013 13:58:19 -0700, Gary Kline wrote:
> Organization: Thought Unlimited. Public service Unix since 1986.
> Of_Interest: With 27 years of service to the Unix community.
>
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 10:05:06PM +0200, Polytropon wrote:
> > I also assume the zsh has some settings on how many commands
> > should be kept in history. The system's /etc/csh.cshrc provides
> > the csh's equivalent:
> >
> > set history = 100
> > set savehist = 100
>
>
> I'remember seeing this a long time ago. in my ~/.zshrc I've got
> iit in all CAPS.
>
>
>
> HISTFILE=~/.zhistory
> SAVEHIST='5000'
> HISTSIZE=1000
>
>
> got to google this; been tooo long since I glanced at the code!
That's probably correct, it reflects the "sh-like aspects"
of code (as I said, csh is a terrible scripting shell, and
this is also true regarding its configuration files). So
those entries look correct.
I'm not a zsh user, so I can't say this for sure. I'm heavily
infected with csh already. ;-)
On Thu, 26 Sep 2013 14:15:17 -0700, Gary Kline wrote:
> FWIW, I just tried:
>
> alias -- h='history 50'
>
>
> works as it ought; last time I tried, the history quit
> after ~10. [?]
The reason might be that the history, at this point in time,
did only contain 10 entries. I don't know how the content
of ~/.zhistory behaves if more than one shell is running
for a given user...
The Z shell is very customizable and can automate routine
tasks (regarding the shell dialog) in a pleasant manner.
If you want the last 10 commands to be displayed before the
shell prompt appears, try something like this in ~/.zshrc:
function precmd {
history 10 | awk 'BEGIN {histcmds=10} { printf("\t%2d\t%s\n",
-(histcmds-i), $0); i++ }' | grep -v "histcmds"
}
Not tested, but it seems to be much easier as zsh simply
defines a function "precmd" and doesn't require the user
to fight with quotes, doublequotes and escaping as csh
successfully does. :-)
--
Polytropon
Magdeburg, Germany
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: minor vi/vim qstn
Organization: Thought Unlimited. Public service Unix since 1986.
Of_Interest: With 27 years of service to the Unix community.
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 10:05:06PM +0200, Polytropon wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Sep 2013 12:51:32 -0700, Gary Kline wrote:
> > my zsh does a default to 10 or so history with just
> >
> > % h
> >
> > I was trying to remember how to set it to ,, say, 100.
>
> Depending on _typical_ terminal heights (100 lines?), this
> seems to be a bit high. But I assume zsh handles the "h"
> alias similarly to the csh, where an alias is defined
> (system-wide in /etc/csh.cshrc or per user in ~/.cshrc).
> Look for ~/.zshrc (if I remember correctly):
>
> alias h 'history 25'
>
> and change it accordingly. An interactive change is also
> possible (but will only be kept for the current session).
>
> I also assume the zsh has some settings on how many commands
> should be kept in history. The system's /etc/csh.cshrc provides
> the csh's equivalent:
>
> set history = 100
> set savehist = 100
>
> Probably zsh has something similar.
>
FWIW, I just tried:
alias -- h='history 50'
works as it ought; last time I tried, the history quit
after ~10. [?]
>
> > (for as many centuries as ive been using vi [nvi], there are
> > *still* things I never had need to learn. so it turns out that
> > a lot of theses "clever" sh scripts are over my head it
> > takes mins -> hours to figure out.
>
> You notice that you're saying that to a programmer whose
> shell scripts are usually overcomplicated, dull, and could
> use lots of optimization? ;-)
>
>
>
> > > % history 20 | awk 'BEGIN {cmds=20} { printf("\t%2d\t%s\n", -(cmds-i),
> > > $0); i++ }' | grep -v "history"
> > >
> > > It might be good to define a better exclusion pattern than just
> > > "history" because that might lead to false-positives. I'd suggest
> > > to rename the variables in the awk script to something unique and
> > > then grep for those instead...
> > >
> > I have grep -v aliased to grv.
>
> If you're using that alias inside another alias, zsh (if it
> acts like csh) will expand it properly. Using such an alias
> in a "one-time entry" (as I'd consider an addition to a
> configuration file) still doesn't sound optimal regarding
> readability and maintainability. As if we would ever maintain
> our "naturally grown" (over centuries) configuration files... ;-)
>
> Still I think turning the example into a shell alias ("h20") or
> assigning it (with 20 -> 10) to the "precmd" alias could not
> be trivial, at least regarding the C shell, because lots of
> quoting and escaping would be needed; maybe zsh does not behave
> like a madman in this regards ("unmatched this, unmatched that,
> sytax error, cannot expand, missing argument, blah ..."). :-)
>
>
>
>
> --
> Polytropon
> Magdeburg, Germany
> Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
> Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
> ___
> freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
--
Gary Kline kl...@thought.org http://www.thought.org Public Service Unix
Twenty-seven years of service to the Unix community.
http://www.thought.org/HOPE
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: minor vi/vim qstn
Organization: Thought Unlimited. Public service Unix since 1986.
Of_Interest: With 27 years of service to the Unix community.
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 10:05:06PM +0200, Polytropon wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Sep 2013 12:51:32 -0700, Gary Kline wrote:
> > my zsh does a default to 10 or so history with just
> >
> > % h
> >
> > I was trying to remember how to set it to ,, say, 100.
>
> Depending on _typical_ terminal heights (100 lines?), this
> seems to be a bit high. But I assume zsh handles the "h"
> alias similarly to the csh, where an alias is defined
> (system-wide in /etc/csh.cshrc or per user in ~/.cshrc).
> Look for ~/.zshrc (if I remember correctly):
>
> alias h 'history 25'
>
> and change it accordingly. An interactive change is also
> possible (but will only be kept for the current session).
>
> I also assume the zsh has some settings on how many commands
> should be kept in history. The system's /etc/csh.cshrc provides
> the csh's equivalent:
>
> set history = 100
> set savehist = 100
I'remember seeing this a long time ago. in my ~/.zshrc I've got
iit in all CAPS.
HISTFILE=~/.zhistory
SAVEHIST='5000'
HISTSIZE=1000
got to google this; been tooo long since I glanced at the code!
>
> Probably zsh has something similar.
>
>
>
> > (for as many centuries as ive been using vi [nvi], there are
> > *still* things I never had need to learn. so it turns out that
> > a lot of theses "clever" sh scripts are over my head it
> > takes mins -> hours to figure out.
>
> You notice that you're saying that to a programmer whose
> shell scripts are usually overcomplicated, dull, and could
> use lots of optimization? ;-)
>
;-)
>
> > > % history 20 | awk 'BEGIN {cmds=20} { printf("\t%2d\t%s\n", -(cmds-i),
> > > $0); i++ }' | grep -v "history"
> > >
> > > It might be good to define a better exclusion pattern than just
> > > "history" because that might lead to false-positives. I'd suggest
> > > to rename the variables in the awk script to something unique and
> > > then grep for those instead...
> > >
> > I have grep -v aliased to grv.
>
> If you're using that alias inside another alias, zsh (if it
> acts like csh) will expand it properly. Using such an alias
> in a "one-time entry" (as I'd consider an addition to a
> configuration file) still doesn't sound optimal regarding
> readability and maintainability. As if we would ever maintain
> our "naturally grown" (over centuries) configuration files... ;-)
>
> Still I think turning the example into a shell alias ("h20") or
> assigning it (with 20 -> 10) to the "precmd" alias could not
> be trivial, at least regarding the C shell, because lots of
> quoting and escaping would be needed; maybe zsh does not behave
> like a madman in this regards ("unmatched this, unmatched that,
> sytax error, cannot expand, missing argument, blah ..."). :-)
>
>
I'll be typing for 10 years before I'v saved the keystrokes ive
spent here
>
> --
> Polytropon
> Magdeburg, Germany
> Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
> Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
--
Gary Kline kl...@thought.org http://www.thought.org Public Service Unix
Twenty-seven years of service to the Unix community.
http://www.thought.org/HOPE
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: minor vi/vim qstn
On Thu, 26 Sep 2013 12:51:32 -0700, Gary Kline wrote:
> my zsh does a default to 10 or so history with just
>
> % h
>
> I was trying to remember how to set it to ,, say, 100.
Depending on _typical_ terminal heights (100 lines?), this
seems to be a bit high. But I assume zsh handles the "h"
alias similarly to the csh, where an alias is defined
(system-wide in /etc/csh.cshrc or per user in ~/.cshrc).
Look for ~/.zshrc (if I remember correctly):
alias h 'history 25'
and change it accordingly. An interactive change is also
possible (but will only be kept for the current session).
I also assume the zsh has some settings on how many commands
should be kept in history. The system's /etc/csh.cshrc provides
the csh's equivalent:
set history = 100
set savehist = 100
Probably zsh has something similar.
> (for as many centuries as ive been using vi [nvi], there are
> *still* things I never had need to learn. so it turns out that
> a lot of theses "clever" sh scripts are over my head it
> takes mins -> hours to figure out.
You notice that you're saying that to a programmer whose
shell scripts are usually overcomplicated, dull, and could
use lots of optimization? ;-)
> > % history 20 | awk 'BEGIN {cmds=20} { printf("\t%2d\t%s\n", -(cmds-i),
> > $0); i++ }' | grep -v "history"
> >
> > It might be good to define a better exclusion pattern than just
> > "history" because that might lead to false-positives. I'd suggest
> > to rename the variables in the awk script to something unique and
> > then grep for those instead...
> >
> I have grep -v aliased to grv.
If you're using that alias inside another alias, zsh (if it
acts like csh) will expand it properly. Using such an alias
in a "one-time entry" (as I'd consider an addition to a
configuration file) still doesn't sound optimal regarding
readability and maintainability. As if we would ever maintain
our "naturally grown" (over centuries) configuration files... ;-)
Still I think turning the example into a shell alias ("h20") or
assigning it (with 20 -> 10) to the "precmd" alias could not
be trivial, at least regarding the C shell, because lots of
quoting and escaping would be needed; maybe zsh does not behave
like a madman in this regards ("unmatched this, unmatched that,
sytax error, cannot expand, missing argument, blah ..."). :-)
--
Polytropon
Magdeburg, Germany
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: minor vi/vim qstn
Organization: Thought Unlimited. Public service Unix since 1986.
Of_Interest: With 27 years of service to the Unix community.
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 03:26:29PM +0200, Polytropon wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 19:47:08 -0700, Gary Kline wrote:
> > dunno how you know im using the zsh, but yup.
>
> This is because of my magical allknowinglyness. :-)
>
> You wrote:
>
> > > > pts/14 17:11 [5011] vi!
> > > > zsh: command not found: vi!
> ^^^
> This gave me the impression you're using the Z shell.
>
> The C shell says:
>
> % vi!
> vi!: Command not found.
>
> And bash says:
>
> $ vi!
> bash: vi!: command not found
>
> So the shell that says "zsh" should be the Z shell, or a different
> shell that's just lying. :-)
Oh, n! ive got to go hide my head in the sand for 25
years... { it's so emmbarrassing!!}
>
> > with the bang stuff
> > if you do a
> >
> > % !-3
> >
> > you go back three vi cmds. !-N, N cmds.
>
> Yes, this also works in C shell. You can use the "h" (or "history")
> builtin command to get an impression of content of the last commands
> submitted to the shell.
>
> At least in csh,
>
> % !-1
>
> equals
>
> % !!
>
> and repeats the last command.
>
> You could use the following command to print the last 20 commands
> with the relative number (-1, -2, -3 and so on) printed infront of
> them:
>
> % history 20 | awk 'BEGIN {cmds=20} { printf("\t%2d\t%s\n", -(cmds-i),
> $0); i++ }'
>
> It's probably a good idea to define an alias for that, like "h20"
> (history of last 20 commands).
my zsh does a default to 10 or so history with just
% h
I was trying to remember how to set it to ,, say, 100.
I use as many zsh-isms as saves keystrokes. thanks for that
awk shortcut; ill use ir... :_)
> You could also use the zsh's equivalent of the "precmd" alias: It
> is a command that will be executed prior to displaying the shell
> prompt, so after you're done with a command, the last commands
> (maybe shortened to 10, just substitute the two appearances of
> the "20" to "10") will be displayed before the prompt appears;
> this will make it easier (and save keystrokes) to check the last
> commands and maybe repeat one.
>
> Downside: The command "pollutes" the list of commands with itself,
> so it should probably be grepped away.
good grief, man. I just got up from a nap... can you re-word that?
no, kidding. I get it.
(for as many centuries as ive been using vi [nvi], there are
*still* things I never had need to learn. so it turns out that
a lot of theses "clever" sh scripts are over my head it
takes mins -> hours to figure out.
>
> % history 20 | awk 'BEGIN {cmds=20} { printf("\t%2d\t%s\n", -(cmds-i),
> $0); i++ }' | grep -v "history"
>
> It might be good to define a better exclusion pattern than just
> "history" because that might lead to false-positives. I'd suggest
> to rename the variables in the awk script to something unique and
> then grep for those instead...
>
I have grep -v aliased to grv.
>
> > thankfully there are shortcuts!
>
> And shell aliases. :-)
>
>
>
> > ps: zsh is sort of a ksh clone; I remember porting the zsh onto
> > my 286 in 1989. got a lot of csh-isms :)
>
> The Z shell combines nice interactive features of the C shell
> (to be correct: the tcsh) and the scripting features of sh and
> bash. It's considered one of the most powerful shells. So it's
> a wise move to use it, because it combines "the _good_ things of
> both worlds" (and not the bad things, as the csh is a terrible
> scripting shell, just as plain sh is an awful dialog shell).
>
>
>
> --
> Polytropon
> Magdeburg, Germany
> Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
> Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
> ___
> freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
--
Gary Kline kl...@thought.org http://www.thought.org Public Service Unix
Twenty-seven years of service to the Unix community.
http://www.thought.org/HOPE
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: minor vi/vim qstn
On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 19:47:08 -0700, Gary Kline wrote:
> dunno how you know im using the zsh, but yup.
This is because of my magical allknowinglyness. :-)
You wrote:
> > > pts/14 17:11 [5011] vi!
> > > zsh: command not found: vi!
^^^
This gave me the impression you're using the Z shell.
The C shell says:
% vi!
vi!: Command not found.
And bash says:
$ vi!
bash: vi!: command not found
So the shell that says "zsh" should be the Z shell, or a different
shell that's just lying. :-)
> with the bang stuff
> if you do a
>
> % !-3
>
> you go back three vi cmds. !-N, N cmds.
Yes, this also works in C shell. You can use the "h" (or "history")
builtin command to get an impression of content of the last commands
submitted to the shell.
At least in csh,
% !-1
equals
% !!
and repeats the last command.
You could use the following command to print the last 20 commands
with the relative number (-1, -2, -3 and so on) printed infront of
them:
% history 20 | awk 'BEGIN {cmds=20} { printf("\t%2d\t%s\n", -(cmds-i),
$0); i++ }'
It's probably a good idea to define an alias for that, like "h20"
(history of last 20 commands).
You could also use the zsh's equivalent of the "precmd" alias: It
is a command that will be executed prior to displaying the shell
prompt, so after you're done with a command, the last commands
(maybe shortened to 10, just substitute the two appearances of
the "20" to "10") will be displayed before the prompt appears;
this will make it easier (and save keystrokes) to check the last
commands and maybe repeat one.
Downside: The command "pollutes" the list of commands with itself,
so it should probably be grepped away.
% history 20 | awk 'BEGIN {cmds=20} { printf("\t%2d\t%s\n", -(cmds-i),
$0); i++ }' | grep -v "history"
It might be good to define a better exclusion pattern than just
"history" because that might lead to false-positives. I'd suggest
to rename the variables in the awk script to something unique and
then grep for those instead...
> thankfully there are shortcuts!
And shell aliases. :-)
> ps: zsh is sort of a ksh clone; I remember porting the zsh onto
> my 286 in 1989. got a lot of csh-isms :)
The Z shell combines nice interactive features of the C shell
(to be correct: the tcsh) and the scripting features of sh and
bash. It's considered one of the most powerful shells. So it's
a wise move to use it, because it combines "the _good_ things of
both worlds" (and not the bad things, as the csh is a terrible
scripting shell, just as plain sh is an awful dialog shell).
--
Polytropon
Magdeburg, Germany
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: minor vi/vim qstn
Organization: Thought Unlimited. Public service Unix since 1986. Of_Interest: With 27 years of service to the Unix community. On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 03:06:00AM +0200, Polytropon wrote: > On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 17:21:04 -0700, Gary Kline wrote: > > Organization: Thought Unlimited. Public service Unix since 1986. > > Of_Interest: With 27 years of service to the Unix community. > > > > On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 12:23:27AM +0200, Polytropon wrote: > > > On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 14:27:41 -0700, Gary Kline wrote: > > > > am I misremembering this feature, or didnt vi have a syntax > > > > where > > > > you typed something like: > > > > > > > > % vi[#] or % vi [-2] [or vi [-N] > > > > > > > > to repeat the last or the second from last command? with my > > > > shoulder sore bloody sore I need to save every key stroke. > > > > > > To repeat the last command, "." can be used. > > > > > > The vi editor (and probably vim and gvim) supports > > > according to "man vi": > > > > > >[Vi]i[sual][!] [+cmd] [file] > > > Vi mode only. Edit a new file. > > > > > > Is this what you're searching for? > > > > > > I THOGoHT it was "!", but lookit: > > > > > > pts/14 17:11 [5010] vi sent > > pts/14 17:11 [5011] vi! > > zsh: command not found: vi! > > pts/14 17:12 [5012] > > > > ... this is vi == vim. > > > > AHA:: found it. it's [bang] > > > > > > pts/14 17:17 [5016] vi sent > > pts/14 17:17 [5017] !v > > > > > > I'll tell ya, if vi disappeared , I'd end it all! > > Ah, I see - you've been refering to repeating a _shell_ > command (so the question was regarding the shell, which > in your case is Z shell). > > You can probably use (like in the C shell) the arrow keys > to browse the command history. Similarly, you can use the > "!" command refering to the command number obtained > by the "history" command. There's a handy alias defined > globally for the C shell: "h" which means "history 25" > (lists the last 25 commands), handy in regards of saving > keystrokes. :-) > > I assume the zsh is also capable of "filtered history": > For example, you enter "vi s" and use the up and down > arrow keys to browse all commands that have been entered > starting with "vi s" (for example "vi sent", "vi stuff" > and so on). If the system's csh can do this, zsh should > also provide this useful feature. > > And as your prompt "pts/14 17:12 [5012]" suggests, > the command number is being shown. If this information > is the same as the command number in the history, entering > "!5010" would execute the 2nd from last command. > > To repeat the last command, whatever it has been, "!!" > can be used. Again, this works in csh, so I can't predict > if it will work in zsh too, but I _assume_ it does. > dunno how you know im using the zsh, but yup. with the bang stuff if you do a % !-3 you go back three vi cmds. !-N, N cmds. thankfully there are shortcuts! gary ps: zsh is sort of a ksh clone; I remember porting the zsh onto my 286 in 1989. got a lot of csh-isms :) -- Gary Kline kl...@thought.org http://www.thought.org Public Service Unix Twenty-seven years of service to the Unix community. http://www.thought.org/HOPE ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: minor vi/vim qstn
On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 17:21:04 -0700, Gary Kline wrote: > Organization: Thought Unlimited. Public service Unix since 1986. > Of_Interest: With 27 years of service to the Unix community. > > On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 12:23:27AM +0200, Polytropon wrote: > > On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 14:27:41 -0700, Gary Kline wrote: > > > am I misremembering this feature, or didnt vi have a syntax where > > > you typed something like: > > > > > > % vi[#] or % vi [-2] [or vi [-N] > > > > > > to repeat the last or the second from last command? with my > > > shoulder sore bloody sore I need to save every key stroke. > > > > To repeat the last command, "." can be used. > > > > The vi editor (and probably vim and gvim) supports > > according to "man vi": > > > >[Vi]i[sual][!] [+cmd] [file] > > Vi mode only. Edit a new file. > > > > Is this what you're searching for? > > > I THOGoHT it was "!", but lookit: > > > pts/14 17:11 [5010] vi sent > pts/14 17:11 [5011] vi! > zsh: command not found: vi! > pts/14 17:12 [5012] > > ... this is vi == vim. > > AHA:: found it. it's [bang] > > > pts/14 17:17 [5016] vi sent > pts/14 17:17 [5017] !v > > > I'll tell ya, if vi disappeared , I'd end it all! Ah, I see - you've been refering to repeating a _shell_ command (so the question was regarding the shell, which in your case is Z shell). You can probably use (like in the C shell) the arrow keys to browse the command history. Similarly, you can use the "!" command refering to the command number obtained by the "history" command. There's a handy alias defined globally for the C shell: "h" which means "history 25" (lists the last 25 commands), handy in regards of saving keystrokes. :-) I assume the zsh is also capable of "filtered history": For example, you enter "vi s" and use the up and down arrow keys to browse all commands that have been entered starting with "vi s" (for example "vi sent", "vi stuff" and so on). If the system's csh can do this, zsh should also provide this useful feature. And as your prompt "pts/14 17:12 [5012]" suggests, the command number is being shown. If this information is the same as the command number in the history, entering "!5010" would execute the 2nd from last command. To repeat the last command, whatever it has been, "!!" can be used. Again, this works in csh, so I can't predict if it will work in zsh too, but I _assume_ it does. -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: minor vi/vim qstn
Organization: Thought Unlimited. Public service Unix since 1986. Of_Interest: With 27 years of service to the Unix community. On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 12:23:27AM +0200, Polytropon wrote: > On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 14:27:41 -0700, Gary Kline wrote: > > am I misremembering this feature, or didnt vi have a syntax where > > you typed something like: > > > > % vi[#] or % vi [-2] [or vi [-N] > > > > to repeat the last or the second from last command? with my > > shoulder sore bloody sore I need to save every key stroke. > > To repeat the last command, "." can be used. > > The vi editor (and probably vim and gvim) supports > according to "man vi": > >[Vi]i[sual][!] [+cmd] [file] > Vi mode only. Edit a new file. > > Is this what you're searching for? I THOGoHT it was "!", but lookit: pts/14 17:11 [5010] vi sent pts/14 17:11 [5011] vi! zsh: command not found: vi! pts/14 17:12 [5012] ... this is vi == vim. AHA:: found it. it's [bang] pts/14 17:17 [5016] vi sent pts/14 17:17 [5017] !v I'll tell ya, if vi disappeared , I'd end it all! tx. gary > Or do you refer to command lines where "@:" would repeat the -N T- 34/41: P> last command (started with ":")? > > -- > Polytropon > Magdeburg, Germany > Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 > Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... -- Gary Kline kl...@thought.org http://www.thought.org Public Service Unix Twenty-seven years of service to the Unix community. http://www.thought.org/HOPE ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: minor vi/vim qstn
On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 14:27:41 -0700, Gary Kline wrote: > am I misremembering this feature, or didnt vi have a syntax where > you typed something like: > > % vi[#] or % vi [-2] [or vi [-N] > > to repeat the last or the second from last command? with my > shoulder sore bloody sore I need to save every key stroke. To repeat the last command, "." can be used. The vi editor (and probably vim and gvim) supports according to "man vi": [Vi]i[sual][!] [+cmd] [file] Vi mode only. Edit a new file. Is this what you're searching for? Or do you refer to command lines where "@:" would repeat the last command (started with ":")? -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
minor vi/vim qstn
Organization: Thought Unlimited. Public service Unix since 1986. Of_Interest: With 27 years of service to the Unix community. folks, am I misremembering this feature, or didnt vi have a syntax where you typed something like: % vi[#] or % vi [-2] [or vi [-N] to repeat the last or the second from last command? with my shoulder sore bloody sore I need to save every key stroke. TIA, y'all, gary -- Gary Kline kl...@thought.org http://www.thought.org Public Service Unix Twenty-seven years of service to the Unix community. http://www.thought.org/HOPE ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
how to i set the vi bindings to kwrite? [or kwrite-devel]?
Ok, so it's KATE or kwrite or <>. I found something about 5yy (yank 5 lines). But nothing about setting up the vi/vim abbrevs feature; how to use the abbreviations feature in this KDE edititor. most of us---or, really, 100%---know how to use the abbrev feature in vi. but my intended user might be the novice user in some backwoods country and might have trouble learning tools like vi. Thus, it makes more sense for these users to use keyboard and mouse in the simplest GUI style. While any GUI text editor would do, it loooks like kwrite has C++ plugin capabilities. If kwrite can bind to vi/vim, so much the better. How do i set these binding, assuming that i can? tia! gary -- Gary Kline kl...@thought.org http://www.thought.org Public Service Unix Journey Toward the Dawn, E-Book: http://www.thought.org The 8.51a release of Jottings: http://jottings.thought.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: what are the plain GUI text editors that use the abbrev [as in vi]?
On Sun, Oct 02, 2011 at 10:57:28AM -0700, Gary Kline wrote: > On Sun, Oct 02, 2011 at 03:40:39AM -0700, Randal L. Schwartz wrote: > > Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2011 03:40:39 -0700 > > From: "Randal L. Schwartz" > > Subject: Re: what are the plain GUI text editors that use the abbrev [as in > > vi]? > > To: Gary Kline > > Cc: FreeBSD Mailing List > > > > >>>>> "Gary" == Gary Kline writes: > > > > Gary> several months ago i asked this list if there were any =easier= text > > Gary> editors than vi[m] that had the abbrev ability. > > > > GNU Emacs is easier for me than vim is. And it has abbrev mode. > > > I'm looking for a GUI editor that can be used by most > people with little training. Somebody told me that one of > the GUI editors have the abbreviation feature. > > [the only way i can use emacs is with xemacs and VILE! > back to vi.] vile has abbreviate... "abbreviate" or"show-abbreviations" ( establish shorthand for another string, or show all abbreviations ) -- Thomas E. Dickey http://invisible-island.net ftp://invisible-island.net pgpQA09sEwZ7a.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: what are the plain GUI text editors that use the abbrev [as in vi]?
On Sun, Oct 02, 2011 at 03:40:39AM -0700, Randal L. Schwartz wrote: > Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2011 03:40:39 -0700 > From: "Randal L. Schwartz" > Subject: Re: what are the plain GUI text editors that use the abbrev [as in > vi]? > To: Gary Kline > Cc: FreeBSD Mailing List > > >>>>> "Gary" == Gary Kline writes: > > Gary> several months ago i asked this list if there were any =easier= text > Gary> editors than vi[m] that had the abbrev ability. > > GNU Emacs is easier for me than vim is. And it has abbrev mode. I'm looking for a GUI editor that can be used by most people with little training. Somebody told me that one of the GUI editors have the abbreviation feature. [the only way i can use emacs is with xemacs and VILE! back to vi.] > > -- > Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095 > http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/> > Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc. > See http://methodsandmessages.posterous.com/ for Smalltalk discussion -- Gary Kline kl...@thought.org http://www.thought.org Public Service Unix Journey Toward the Dawn, E-Book: http://www.thought.org The 8.51a release of Jottings: http://jottings.thought.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: what are the plain GUI text editors that use the abbrev [as in vi]?
>>>>> "Gary" == Gary Kline writes: Gary> several months ago i asked this list if there were any =easier= text Gary> editors than vi[m] that had the abbrev ability. GNU Emacs is easier for me than vim is. And it has abbrev mode. -- Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095 http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/> Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc. See http://methodsandmessages.posterous.com/ for Smalltalk discussion ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
what are the plain GUI text editors that use the abbrev [as in vi]?
several months ago i asked this list if there were any =easier= text editors than vi[m] that had the abbrev ability. ab u you ab r are ab thz these ab plz please etc. now that i have my key-click program working--however tententively-- it is time to work on the rest of my 'speech computer' suite. IIRC, there was at least one--like kate--that was able to use abbreviations and help those folk who cannot type fast and/or who are hunt-andd-pek type typist [like me] who never take their eyes off the keyboard. i plan on using gvim ((maybe)) and one GUI type editor. i'm also requesting ideas. as many as you guys are willing to share. tia, gary -- Gary Kline kl...@thought.org http://www.thought.org Public Service Unix Journey Toward the Dawn, E-Book: http://www.thought.org The 8.51a release of Jottings: http://jottings.thought.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: why "{" is treated as vi(1) section delimiter
An idea that doesn't solve the problem, but may provide an idea
for a workaround by changing the setting:
On Fri, 24 Jun 2011 11:29:11 +0100, Anton Shterenlikht wrote:
> Why then on a *.tex file the above motion
> commands move to "{" in the first column?
>
> For example, in this file:
>
> 1 It is possible to show using linear algebra that Tresca cylinder has
> 2 a hexagon as a base, and von Mises condition has a circle. Because
> 3 neither is dependent on the volumetric stress, it is convenient to
> 4 plot stress states on 2D plane normal to $\sigma_{kk}=0$ plane,
> 5 {\em deviatoric plane}, see Fig. \ref{fig:plane}
> 6
> 7 \begin{figure}[htb]
> 8 \centerline{\includegraphics[width=6cm]{./figs/yield_plane.pdf}}
> 9 \caption{Tresca hexagon and von Mises circle on the deviatoric plane.}
>10 \label{fig:plane}
>11 \end{figure}
>12
>
> vi "[[" or "]]" move to line 5.
Maybe I'm the wrong person to say that, but I'm "doing it wrong"
all the time:
You are using \em, scoped by { ... } to emphasize text. The
recommended way is to use \textem{ ... }. If you try to use
the "non-fragile" LaTeX command instead of the "low level" TeX
macros, can you change the behaviour regarding the delimiters?
If you want to keep the \em macro, you could remove the scope
given by { and } and end the emphasized sequence by \rm, falling
back to "normal" roman typeface.
But as I said, I'm using {\em ...}, {\bf ...}, {\tt ...} and so on
on a regular basis. :-)
--
Polytropon
Magdeburg, Germany
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
why "{" is treated as vi(1) section delimiter
vi(1) motion commands "]]" and "[[" move to
beginning of next or previous section respectively.
Using vi(1) ":set sect" command I can verify
that a section in my case is set to:
sections="NHSHH HUnhsh"
Why then on a *.tex file the above motion
commands move to "{" in the first column?
For example, in this file:
1 It is possible to show using linear algebra that Tresca cylinder has
2 a hexagon as a base, and von Mises condition has a circle. Because
3 neither is dependent on the volumetric stress, it is convenient to
4 plot stress states on 2D plane normal to $\sigma_{kk}=0$ plane,
5 {\em deviatoric plane}, see Fig. \ref{fig:plane}
6
7 \begin{figure}[htb]
8 \centerline{\includegraphics[width=6cm]{./figs/yield_plane.pdf}}
9 \caption{Tresca hexagon and von Mises circle on the deviatoric plane.}
10 \label{fig:plane}
11 \end{figure}
12
vi "[[" or "]]" move to line 5.
Many thanks
--
Anton Shterenlikht
Room 2.6, Queen's Building
Mech Eng Dept
Bristol University
University Walk, Bristol BS8 1TR, UK
Tel: +44 (0)117 331 5944
Fax: +44 (0)117 929 4423
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: double spacing in vim, vi, or cream
On Sun, 17 Apr 2011 08:59:55 -0400, david coder wrote:
> +++ Matthias Apitz [17/04/11 06:25 +0200]:
> >El día Saturday, April 16, 2011 a las 09:47:58PM -0400, david coder escribió:
> >
> >> interesting suggestions that i hadn't thought of, esp knowing nothing about
> >> LaTeX. the 1st, however, results in spaces between characters, whereas
> >> what
> >> i wanted was double-spacing between lines in a piece to be submitted for
> >> publication.
> >
> >At the end of editing the file:
> >
> >:1,$s-$-^M-
> >
> >(the ^M is to be done by holding down CTRL and pressing V and M)
> >
> >HIH
> >
> > matthias
> >--
> >Matthias Apitz
> >t +49-89-61308 351 - f +49-89-61308 399 - m +49-170-4527211
> >e - w http://www.unixarea.de/
> >¡Ya basta! ¡Imperialistas occidentales, quitad las manos de Libia!
> >
> >There's an end of it! Imperialists occidentals, hands off Libya!
> >
> >Schluss jetzt endlich! Imperialisten des Westens, Haende weg von Libyen!
> >___
> >freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
> >http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> >To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
>
> Schoen! Nun brauche ich nur Methoden das wie ich auf der Machine schreibe
> machen.
>
> (Auch wie man Umlauten auf eine Americanische Machine macht.) ;)
>
> Besten Dank,
>
> David
That's quite simple: Use LaTeX. Really, it solves all your
problems. You can easily code Umlauts and Eszett in a smart
way: \usepackage{german} and then:
Der L"owe fri"st M"usli.
Und "Ol mag er auch.
LaTeX also pays attention to placing the ligatures properly.
You can easily create PDF output (for sending text to others),
as well as easy printing (PS output).
In pure text mode, you can of course use ae, oe, ue and ss
substitutions which are valid.
--
Polytropon
Magdeburg, Germany
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: double spacing in vim, vi, or cream
On Sun, 17 Apr 2011 06:25:45 +0200, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> El día Saturday, April 16, 2011 a las 09:47:58PM -0400, david coder escribió:
>
> > interesting suggestions that i hadn't thought of, esp knowing nothing about
> > LaTeX. the 1st, however, results in spaces between characters, whereas what
> > i wanted was double-spacing between lines in a piece to be submitted for
> > publication.
Okay, I see now. My mistake. :-)
> At the end of editing the file:
>
> :1,$s-$-^M-
>
> (the ^M is to be done by holding down CTRL and pressing V and M)
And if you want a postprocessing solution, use the command
awk '{ printf("%s\n\n", $0); }' < single.txt > double.txt
for "vertical double-spacing".
--
Polytropon
Magdeburg, Germany
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: double spacing in vim, vi, or cream
+++ Matthias Apitz [17/04/11 06:25 +0200]: El día Saturday, April 16, 2011 a las 09:47:58PM -0400, david coder escribió: interesting suggestions that i hadn't thought of, esp knowing nothing about LaTeX. the 1st, however, results in spaces between characters, whereas what i wanted was double-spacing between lines in a piece to be submitted for publication. At the end of editing the file: :1,$s-$-^M- (the ^M is to be done by holding down CTRL and pressing V and M) HIH matthias -- Matthias Apitz t +49-89-61308 351 - f +49-89-61308 399 - m +49-170-4527211 e - w http://www.unixarea.de/ ¡Ya basta! ¡Imperialistas occidentales, quitad las manos de Libia! There's an end of it! Imperialists occidentals, hands off Libya! Schluss jetzt endlich! Imperialisten des Westens, Haende weg von Libyen! ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" Schoen! Nun brauche ich nur Methoden das wie ich auf der Machine schreibe machen. (Auch wie man Umlauten auf eine Americanische Machine macht.) ;) Besten Dank, David ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: double spacing in vim, vi, or cream
El día Saturday, April 16, 2011 a las 09:47:58PM -0400, david coder escribió: > interesting suggestions that i hadn't thought of, esp knowing nothing about > LaTeX. the 1st, however, results in spaces between characters, whereas what > i wanted was double-spacing between lines in a piece to be submitted for > publication. At the end of editing the file: :1,$s-$-^M- (the ^M is to be done by holding down CTRL and pressing V and M) HIH matthias -- Matthias Apitz t +49-89-61308 351 - f +49-89-61308 399 - m +49-170-4527211 e - w http://www.unixarea.de/ ¡Ya basta! ¡Imperialistas occidentales, quitad las manos de Libia! There's an end of it! Imperialists occidentals, hands off Libya! Schluss jetzt endlich! Imperialisten des Westens, Haende weg von Libyen! ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: double spacing in vim, vi, or cream
+++ Polytropon [17/04/11 00:28 +0200]:
On Sat, 16 Apr 2011 18:02:36 -0400, david coder wrote:
can anybody tell me how to set vi, vim, or cream so that text is
double-spaced?
If you're fine with postprocessing, use sed 's/./& /g'. If
you want to use LaTeX, \usepackage{soul} and then \so{The
text you want doublespaced}.
interesting suggestions that i hadn't thought of, esp knowing nothing about
LaTeX. the 1st, however, results in spaces between characters, whereas what
i wanted was double-spacing between lines in a piece to be submitted for
publication.
thx much.
dc
--
Polytropon
Magdeburg, Germany
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: double spacing in vim, vi, or cream
On Sat, 16 Apr 2011 18:02:36 -0400, david coder wrote:
>
>
> can anybody tell me how to set vi, vim, or cream so that text is
>
> double-spaced?
>
If you're fine with postprocessing, use sed 's/./& /g'. If
you want to use LaTeX, \usepackage{soul} and then \so{The
text you want doublespaced}.
--
Polytropon
Magdeburg, Germany
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
double spacing in vim, vi, or cream
can anybody tell me how to set vi, vim, or cream so that text is double-spaced? thx much. david coder ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: are there any GUI editors that use vi/vim-like abbreviations
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 08:21:20PM -0600, Adam Vande More wrote: > On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 7:32 PM, Gary Kline wrote: > > >iF we throw out "gvim" since it is simply the GUI variant of > >vim, are there are other GUI editors that use the kinds of :ab > >abbreviations that vi does? > > > > kate, the bundled text editor for KDE can use vi bindings. > > -- > Adam Vande More Interesting. I have use kate by accident a few times. But my fingers did /pattern anf [hjkl] just by habit. So I quit out of it and went back to [n]vi :-) thanks! -- Gary Kline kl...@thought.org http://www.thought.org Public Service Unix Journey Toward the Dawn, E-Book: http://www.thought.org The 7.98a release of Jottings: http://jottings.thought.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: are there any GUI editors that use vi/vim-like abbreviations
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 06:49:18PM -0700, Fred wrote: > On 02/21/11 18:32, Gary Kline wrote: > > iF we throw out "gvim" since it is simply the GUI variant of > > vim, are there are other GUI editors that use the kinds of :ab > > abbreviations that vi does? I ask this because I don't know > > wmany many people with speech imopairments or who cannot speak > > at all would be interested in using my version of vi/vim with > > it's .ex/.nex/.vimrc and my hundred+ abbreviations. > > > > The IM app, pidgin is not an editor, but it does let user use > > the mouse and/or arrow keys. pidgin also uses abbrvs. BEcause > > i type so slowly, i have my pidgin set up to use a slew of > > abbrev. [Well, not the obv's, like 'FWIW' :-) ... but other > > words. > > > > I would be interested in knowing how many list members _don't_ > > know vi and use another editor. just curious > > > > gary > > > > > > > > > I have been using nedit for many years. It is very easy to use. It > uses the mouse, arrow keys, etc. so you don't have to do multiple > keystrokes. Vi is insane. I don't know what you mean about the > abbreviations though. I don't think it does that. The current > version in ports for 8.1-RELEASE has a problem requiring a simple > patch when it is built. This was discussed here a couple weeks ago. > > Best regards, > Fred Very simply, in your .vimrc, if you type :ab i I or :ab thr there anytime you type "i" it goes to "I". The "thr" abbreviation becomes the word "there." gary > > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" -- Gary Kline kl...@thought.org http://www.thought.org Public Service Unix Journey Toward the Dawn, E-Book: http://www.thought.org The 7.98a release of Jottings: http://jottings.thought.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: are there any GUI editors that use vi/vim-like abbreviations
On 21 February 2011 20:49, Fred wrote: > On 02/21/11 18:32, Gary Kline wrote: >> >> iF we throw out "gvim" since it is simply the GUI variant of >> vim, are there are other GUI editors that use the kinds of :ab >> abbreviations that vi does? I ask this because I don't know >> wmany many people with speech imopairments or who cannot speak >> at all would be interested in using my version of vi/vim with >> it's .ex/.nex/.vimrc and my hundred+ abbreviations. >> >> The IM app, pidgin is not an editor, but it does let user use >> the mouse and/or arrow keys. pidgin also uses abbrvs. BEcause >> i type so slowly, i have my pidgin set up to use a slew of >> abbrev. [Well, not the obv's, like 'FWIW' :-) ... but other >> words. >> >> I would be interested in knowing how many list members _don't_ >> know vi and use another editor. just curious >> As little as I like linking to the "en"cyclopaedia that even a paranoid hydrocephalic with (Gilles de la) Tourette syndrome can edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_text_editors#Key_bindings > Vi > is insane. Indeed. http://www.rants.org/ed.html -- -- ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: are there any GUI editors that use vi/vim-like abbreviations
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 7:32 PM, Gary Kline wrote: >iF we throw out "gvim" since it is simply the GUI variant of >vim, are there are other GUI editors that use the kinds of :ab >abbreviations that vi does? > kate, the bundled text editor for KDE can use vi bindings. -- Adam Vande More ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: are there any GUI editors that use vi/vim-like abbreviations
On 02/21/11 18:32, Gary Kline wrote: iF we throw out "gvim" since it is simply the GUI variant of vim, are there are other GUI editors that use the kinds of :ab abbreviations that vi does? I ask this because I don't know wmany many people with speech imopairments or who cannot speak at all would be interested in using my version of vi/vim with it's .ex/.nex/.vimrc and my hundred+ abbreviations. The IM app, pidgin is not an editor, but it does let user use the mouse and/or arrow keys. pidgin also uses abbrvs. BEcause i type so slowly, i have my pidgin set up to use a slew of abbrev. [Well, not the obv's, like 'FWIW' :-) ... but other words. I would be interested in knowing how many list members _don't_ know vi and use another editor. just curious gary I have been using nedit for many years. It is very easy to use. It uses the mouse, arrow keys, etc. so you don't have to do multiple keystrokes. Vi is insane. I don't know what you mean about the abbreviations though. I don't think it does that. The current version in ports for 8.1-RELEASE has a problem requiring a simple patch when it is built. This was discussed here a couple weeks ago. Best regards, Fred ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
are there any GUI editors that use vi/vim-like abbreviations
iF we throw out "gvim" since it is simply the GUI variant of vim, are there are other GUI editors that use the kinds of :ab abbreviations that vi does? I ask this because I don't know wmany many people with speech imopairments or who cannot speak at all would be interested in using my version of vi/vim with it's .ex/.nex/.vimrc and my hundred+ abbreviations. The IM app, pidgin is not an editor, but it does let user use the mouse and/or arrow keys. pidgin also uses abbrvs. BEcause i type so slowly, i have my pidgin set up to use a slew of abbrev. [Well, not the obv's, like 'FWIW' :-) ... but other words. I would be interested in knowing how many list members _don't_ know vi and use another editor. just curious gary -- Gary Kline kl...@thought.org http://www.thought.org Public Service Unix Journey Toward the Dawn, E-Book: http://www.thought.org The 7.98a release of Jottings: http://jottings.thought.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
vi/vim questions
This may apply to other systems that can use a vi clone, not just the BSD's. I am looking for an easy way of turning on/off my list of homonyms that I am trying to set up for my ":abbreviation" list. So, is there a failsafe way of (1) including my ~150 :ab list in vim and turning it on and then (2) turning the vim list off so that, What I-Type-Is-what-I-See [?] In other words, dis-including my list of abbrevs. I tried this with ten or fifteen words last summer in nvi, and it worked very well with my ktts/festival suite. I was able, using my Thinkpad as a testbed, have the computer talk clearly for me. A day or two later I went into C mode for a day or three. After a few hours of enjoying my hacking, I had to stop, remove the :ab words from my ~/.nexrc and continue. For anyone who hasn't read my ideas about this, I am attempting to collect the 130+ most commonly used words and create "natural" or "common sense" abbreviations for each word. Obv'ly, this would be unnecessary for people who have no trouble typing accurately and rapidly. I have decided to use vim because is it widely used as the next step in a text editor based on vi, and because it may allow me to simply include a file in ~/vimrc; I'm not sure how far the improvements go. thanks, everybody, gary -- Gary Kline kl...@thought.org http://www.thought.org Public Service Unix Journey Toward the Dawn, E-Book: http://www.thought.org The 7.97a release of Jottings: http://jottings.thought.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
resizing xterminal while in vi-session forces vi to coredump
Hello, vi coredumps if one is resizing the xterm within the vi session runs. OS is FreeBSD 8.0-STABLE/amd64 r207308: Wed Apr 28 09:10:03 CEST 2010, ports are most recent, X11 has been recompiled in favor of WITHOUT_NOUVEAU=YES Kernel also utilises options TEKEN_UTF8 options TEKEN_XTERM but I think this is for console only. Should I file a PR? Thanks for your patience, O. Hartmann ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: vi question
According to gahn on Fri, 02/19/10 at 16:11: > > How could I use vi to repeat a word, say, 100 times in the same > line, of course with a space in between? Edit your file: (vi xyz) On an empty line, enter: iword(esc) Back up (left arrow) to the front of this line (column zero) Enter this sequence: 2dw (the line will disappear) Enter this sequence: 100P (voila!) Regards, web... -- William Bulley Email: w...@umich.edu 72 characters width template ->| ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: vi question
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010, gahn wrote: >Hi, all: > >How could I use vi to repeat a word, say, 100 times in the same line, of >course with a space in between? Use a repeat count. The following is generated by this: 20a thisword thisword thisword thisword thisword thisword thisword thisword thisword thisword thisword thisword thisword thisword thisword thisword thisword thisword thisword thisword thisword I use this frequently to generate sequences of characters when laying out forms. Bill -- INTERNET: b...@celestial.com Bill Campbell; Celestial Software LLC URL: http://www.celestial.com/ PO Box 820; 6641 E. Mercer Way Voice: (206) 236-1676 Mercer Island, WA 98040-0820 Fax:(206) 232-9186 Skype: jwccsllc (206) 855-5792 When we must wait for Washington to tell us when to sow and when to reap, we shall soon want bread -- Thomas Jefferson ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: vi question
On 2010.02.19 16:11, gahn wrote: > Hi, all: > > How could I use vi to repeat a word, say, 100 times in the same line, of > course with a space in between? Yes. Using the word 'this' as an example: 100ithis Steve ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
vi question
Hi, all: How could I use vi to repeat a word, say, 100 times in the same line, of course with a space in between? Thanks in advance ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: vi editing
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 07:37:49 -0800 (PST), gahn wrote: > Hi gurus: > > I am trying to add a word on every line (right in front of every line) via > vi. Right now I have: > > x > x > x > > after that, I want to have: > > "new word" x > "new word" xxxxx > "new word" x > > How could I do that with vi? :%s/^/new word / ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: vi editing
On Friday 15 January 2010, gahn wrote: > Hi gurus: > > I am trying to add a word on every line (right in front of every > line) via vi. Right now I have: > > x > x > x > > after that, I want to have: > > "new word" x > "new word" xxxxx > "new word" x > > How could I do that with vi? :%s/^/"new word"/ -- Mike Clarke ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: vi editing
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 12:11:32PM -0600, J.D. Bronson wrote: > preface each line: > > :%s/^/new word /g The trailing g isn't needed because you only need one substitution on each line. Thus: :%s/^/new word / -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] pgpHKscgdZrD2.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: vi editing
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 07:37:49 -0800 (PST) gahn wrote: > I am trying to add a word on every line (right in front of every line) via > vi. Right now I have: > x > x > x Type this: :%s/^/"new word" / > after that, I want to have: > "new word" x > "new word" xxxxx > "new word" x > How could I do that with vi? -- WBR, Boris Samorodov (bsam) Research Engineer, http://www.ipt.ru Telephone & Internet SP FreeBSD Committer, http://www.FreeBSD.org The Power To Serve ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: vi editing
preface each line: :%s/^/new word /g -- J.D. Bronson Information Technology Aurora Health Care - Milwaukee WI ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
vi editing
Hi gurus: I am trying to add a word on every line (right in front of every line) via vi. Right now I have: x x x after that, I want to have: "new word" x "new word" x "new word" xxxxx How could I do that with vi? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
On Mon 29 Jun 2009 at 08:19:58 PDT Gary Gatten wrote: Good to know, but I was just being a smart-a$$. I will have to try out WINE though, been reading about it lately.. -Original Message- From: owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of RW Sent: Sunday, June 28, 2009 10:21 PM To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: The question of moving vi to /bin On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 16:15:12 -0500 "Gary Gatten" wrote: I like M$ "Notepad" - is there a version of that for FBSD? Actually, there is. Wine implements it's own version of notepad. Because it implements its own version of the multiline edit control, Notepad is just a thin wrapper around that, providing a main window to house the control and a menu to drive it. Wordpad is to the rich text control as Notepad is to the edit control. Probably (meaning I don't know it for a fact) they were both originally written as testbeds/demos for the controls, which are used throughout Windows. Kinda like the relationship between vi and curses, really -- except that vi was written first and then curses was abstracted from it. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
RE: The question of moving vi to /bin
Good to know, but I was just being a smart-a$$. I will have to try out WINE though, been reading about it lately.. -Original Message- From: owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org] On Behalf 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" 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 http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" "This email is intended to be reviewed by only the intended recipient and may contain information that is privileged and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, use, dissemination, disclosure or copying of this email and its attachments, if any, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and delete this email from your system." ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
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 'Reply to Sender'. I don't know whether the original posting itself got through as well. -- Regards Manish Jain invalid.poin...@gmail.com +91-96500-10329 Laast year I kudn't spell Software Engineer. Now I are won. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
Polytropon 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 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 16:15:12 -0500 "Gary Gatten" 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 http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /binHi,
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 1:23 AM, Gary Kline wrote: [snip] > > 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 ever need. > > gary > > > ps: when bill j. dies and meets st. pete at the pearly > gate, pete'll say: "So what did you do--" And bill > will say, "I wrote vi." red-carpet is rolled out > :_) > You really should give credit where it is due. "I wrote vi -- in one weekend!" ;) -- Glen Barber ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /binHi,
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 06:11:57AM +0200, Polytropon wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 12:03:21 +0800, Erich Dollansky
> wrote:
> > What kind of editor do you need for rescue? Just edit one or two
> > lines in some config file to allow the full system to start
> > again.
> >
> > Rescue does not need an editor programmers are used to edit their
> > source files.
>
> I won't say anything different. For the usual "maintenance and
> get the damn thing working again" tasks the /rescue editor,
> especially vi, should be enough. Commands are i, a, and :wq.
> >From my experience, I can't remember to have used anything
> else.
>
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 ever need.
gary
ps: when bill j. dies and meets st. pete at the pearly
gate, pete'll say: "So what did you do--" And bill
will say, "I wrote vi." red-carpet is rolled out
:_)
>
>
> --
> Polytropon
> >From Magdeburg, Germany
> Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
> Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
> ___
> freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
--
Gary Kline kl...@thought.org http://www.thought.org Public Service Unix
http://jottings.thought.org http://transfinite.thought.org
For FBSD list: http://transfinite.thought.org/slicejourney.php
The 4.98a release of Jottings: http://jottings.thought.org/index.php
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 08:01:02AM +0200, Polytropon wrote: > On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 22:23:17 -0700, Gary Kline 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 ever need. > > Well, I'm not good at vi. As a lazy guy (TM) I honestly prefer > ee, as long as the cursor keys work. If they don't, well, I > 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 and > the content of /rescue to get you back working. > > Maybe this is because vi scared me when using WEGA (which is > the GDR's equivalent of UNIX System III, run on the P8000 > multi-user workstation). Well, we were all young, many many > years in the distant past. :-) > Ah yes true words, never spoken, etc. And I had (past tensed) one of those reference cards ... come to think of it. There're still tricks of vi I don't know. Or, to be correct, nvi, which was said to be a "feature for feature, bug for bug" clone. Yes, i am a geek, just not an extremist:) > > > > ps: when bill j. dies and meets st. pete at the pearly > > gate, pete'll say: "So what did you do--" And bill > > will say, "I wrote vi." red-carpet is rolled out > > :_) > > 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. :-) > > (*Yes*!) LMAO. gary > > -- > Polytropon > From Magdeburg, Germany > Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 > Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... -- Gary Kline kl...@thought.org http://www.thought.org Public Service Unix http://jottings.thought.org http://transfinite.thought.org For FBSD list: http://transfinite.thought.org/slicejourney.php The 4.98a release of Jottings: http://jottings.thought.org/index.php ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
Hi, On 26 June 2009 pm 14:01:02 Polytropon wrote: > On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 22:23:17 -0700, Gary Kline 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 and > the content of /rescue to get you back working. > > 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? > multi-user workstation). Well, we were all young, many many > years in the distant past. :-) You want to say 'yesterday'? > > > ps: when bill j. dies and meets st. pete at the pearly > > gate, pete'll say: "So what did you do--" And bill > > will say, "I wrote vi." red-carpet is rolled out > > > > :_) > > 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. :-) I do not think so. He will go directly to heaven. Why? He made all computer users pray that no data get lost when the machine freezes again. Erich ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 22:23:17 -0700, Gary Kline 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 ever need. Well, I'm not good at vi. As a lazy guy (TM) I honestly prefer ee, as long as the cursor keys work. If they don't, well, I 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 and the content of /rescue to get you back working. Maybe this is because vi scared me when using WEGA (which is the GDR's equivalent of UNIX System III, run on the P8000 multi-user workstation). Well, we were all young, many many years in the distant past. :-) > ps: when bill j. dies and meets st. pete at the pearly >gate, pete'll say: "So what did you do--" And bill >will say, "I wrote vi." red-carpet is rolled out >:_) 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. :-) -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 16:15:12 -0500, "Gary Gatten" 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 sweet too Try the Midnight Commander's mcedit editor, it has some of the functionaliy, keyboard-usage-wise... -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /binHi,
2009/6/28 Mark E Doner : > Erich Dollansky wrote: >> >> On 26 June 2009 am 10:02:30 Polytropon wrote: >> >>> >>> Polytropon >>> From Magdeburg, Germany >>> >> >> big brother is watching me. >> >> An xterm just came up with this message: >> >> "The default editor in FreeBSD is vi, which is efficient to use when you >> have learned it, but somewhat user-unfriendly. To use ee (an easier but >> less powerful editor) instead, set the environment variable EDITOR to >> /usr/bin/ee" >> >> Isn't this the best reasoning why it should stay as it is? >> > > Wouldn't it be cool if there was an option you could toss in make.conf, like > VI_PREFIX=foo, which defaults to /usr of course? Then people who want to > move vi to /bin could rebuild world without worrying about it redoing such a > move after every big upgrade, and people who don't want it moved, do > nothing. > > Not that I encourage feature creep or anything. Or: /usr/home/chris amnesiac# ln -s /rescue/vi /bin/vi ### Stop anything meddling with vi! /usr/home/chris amnesiac# chflags -h schg /bin/vi Chris -- A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in a mailing list? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /binHi,
Erich Dollansky wrote: On 26 June 2009 am 10:02:30 Polytropon wrote: Polytropon From Magdeburg, Germany big brother is watching me. An xterm just came up with this message: "The default editor in FreeBSD is vi, which is efficient to use when you have learned it, but somewhat user-unfriendly. To use ee (an easier but less powerful editor) instead, set the environment variable EDITOR to /usr/bin/ee" Isn't this the best reasoning why it should stay as it is? Wouldn't it be cool if there was an option you could toss in make.conf, like VI_PREFIX=foo, which defaults to /usr of course? Then people who want to move vi to /bin could rebuild world without worrying about it redoing such a move after every big upgrade, and people who don't want it moved, do nothing. Not that I encourage feature creep or anything. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
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 this entire thread. The thing is /bin/ed and /rescue/vi have their unique problems and peculiarities. If at least there can be a general consensus that ee should be under /bin, a lot of people could possibly find it beneficial in emergencies. The problem again, I suspect, might be that moving ee to /bin would possibly need the terminal database to be kept under / directly, which goes against freebsd's obsession with a micro-minimalistic base. One solution might be to keep a pared-down version of the database that provides only for the most commonly used terminals to be placed under /, and single-user mode set up to use this database. 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 this entire thread. The thing is /bin/ed and /rescue/vi have their unique problems and peculiarities. If at least there can be a general consensus that ee should be under /bin, a lot of people could possibly find it beneficial in emergencies. The problem again, I suspect, might be that moving ee to /bin would possibly need the terminal database to be kept under / directly, which goes against freebsd's concept of a micro-minimalistic base. One solution might be to keep a pared-down version of the database that provides only for the most commonly used terminals placed under / and single-user mode set up to use this database. -- Regards Manish Jain invalid.poin...@gmail.com +91-96500-10329 Laast year I kudn't spell Software Engineer. Now I are won. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
> 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 music. And > dancing puppies. Hah! I'll have to use this paragraph. Hilarious. :) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
Hi, On 27 June 2009 am 07:08:01 Polytropon wrote: > On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 15:40:50 +0800, Erich Dollansky 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 there was a PDP-11 compatible system. > Contruction mostly concentrated on IBM compatibles (and I don't > mean PCs with that, of course). Maybe there's something > USSR-special with a russian name (Iskra, Minsk, erm, no the > Minsk wasn't a PDP-like...). > there was a PDP copy available but it is not mentioned on this site: > http://www.robotrontechnik.de/index.htm?/html/computer/k1840.ht >m > > And finally, he invented God, the Heaven, the Hell (delivered > in small packages called "Windows"), the universe, life and > everything. Children get educated that way, at least in today's > german schools. :-) A real bad development, also here. Erich ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 15:40:50 +0800, Erich Dollansky 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 there was a PDP-11 compatible system. Contruction mostly concentrated on IBM compatibles (and I don't mean PCs with that, of course). Maybe there's something USSR-special with a russian name (Iskra, Minsk, erm, no the Minsk wasn't a PDP-like...). There in fact was a system compatible to DEC's VAX architecture, the robotron K1840: http://www.robotrontechnik.de/index.htm?/html/computer/k1840.htm It did not only have software support for VAX (with its OS SVP1800), but as well for UNIX (with its OS MUTOS1800). As far as I know, the russians (i. e. the soviets) participated, like every country in the RGW, in manufacturing computers. From the USSR, especially processors were delivered, while other countries "specialized" on other fields, such as the GDR on magnetic tape units. The P8000 was manufactured by EAW in Berlin in the GDR. It was a UNIX System III multi-user workstation environment, used mostly for application programming. http://www.robotrontechnik.de/index.htm?/html/computer/p8000.htm http://www.robotrontechnik.de/index.htm?/html/computer/p8000compact.htm I still own such a system and would like to get it working some day (one P8000 and one P8000 compact). So much for today's history lesson. :-) > > multi-user workstation). Well, we were all young, many many > > years in the distant past. :-) > > You want to say 'yesterday'? No. Yesterday, all my troubles seemed so far away. :-) Being into that "computer stuff" makes you feel old, even when you're young, because you've already seen everything... > > 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. :-) > > I do not think so. He will go directly to heaven. Why? He made all > computer users pray that no data get lost when the machine > freezes again. And finally, he invented God, the Heaven, the Hell (delivered in small packages called "Windows"), the universe, life and everything. Children get educated that way, at least in today's german schools. :-) -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Editor in minimal system (was Re: The question of moving vi to /bin)
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
> (60920 bytes) (both with two library dependencies) to emacs (in ports;
> 5992604 bytes and 50 library dependencies in my installation) and probably
> beyond.
>
> One of them, ed, is available in /bin and therefore in single-user mode.
>
> Two of them, ed and vi, are available in /rescue and therefore in single-user
> mode even when something horrible happens and libraries are broken (although
> /rescue/vi is currently slightly broken itself due to the termcap issue which
> is being fixed in -CURRENT and I hope will be MFC'd).
>
> Anyone who wants /usr/bin/vi available in single-user mode can install
> FreeBSD
> with one large partition; or mount /usr once in single-user mode.
>
> The original poster suggested that the fix for not having vi in /bin was not
> to have any editor at all in /rescue, which comprehensively misses the point
> of /rescue.
>
> The only argument that's been advanced for moving vi seems to be ``vi should
> be in /bin because that's how I want it''. I find that argument unconvincing,
> but it's not up to me. I'm open to a sensible argument, if anyone has one.
>
> Jonathan
What about making it be a build option? Or at least symlink the
static vi in /rescue to /bin...? I mean we have 1.5TB drives
now! 3700 blocks is a burp. A small burp.
For that matter, why not have the option of moving the majority
of /rescue to /bin? I've only had to use the rescue floppy a few
times, but did so only because i needed grep and vi to edit
/etc/fsck ... And major, irksome desl using cat and ed to look
at that file. And a few others in /etc.
gary
--
Gary Kline kl...@thought.org http://www.thought.org Public Service Unix
http://jottings.thought.org http://transfinite.thought.org
For FBSD list: http://transfinite.thought.org/slicejourney.php
The 4.98a release of Jottings: http://jottings.thought.org/index.php
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /binHi,
2009/6/26 Glen Barber : > On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 12:11 AM, Polytropon wrote: >> On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 12:03:21 +0800, Erich Dollansky >> wrote: >>> What kind of editor do you need for rescue? Just edit one or two >>> lines in some config file to allow the full system to start >>> again. >>> >>> Rescue does not need an editor programmers are used to edit their >>> source files. >> >> I won't say anything different. For the usual "maintenance and >> get the damn thing working again" tasks the /rescue editor, >> especially vi, should be enough. Commands are i, a, and :wq. > > Don't forget about dd ;) > > > -- > Glen Barber Or :wq! for when it _just_ _won't_ _write_! Chris -- A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in a mailing list? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Editor in minimal system (was Re: The question of moving vi to /bin)
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; 5992604 bytes and 50 library dependencies in my installation) and probably beyond. One of them, ed, is available in /bin and therefore in single-user mode. Two of them, ed and vi, are available in /rescue and therefore in single-user mode even when something horrible happens and libraries are broken (although /rescue/vi is currently slightly broken itself due to the termcap issue which is being fixed in -CURRENT and I hope will be MFC'd). Anyone who wants /usr/bin/vi available in single-user mode can install FreeBSD with one large partition; or mount /usr once in single-user mode. The original poster suggested that the fix for not having vi in /bin was not to have any editor at all in /rescue, which comprehensively misses the point of /rescue. The only argument that's been advanced for moving vi seems to be ``vi should be in /bin because that's how I want it''. I find that argument unconvincing, but it's not up to me. I'm open to a sensible argument, if anyone has one. Jonathan ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
2009/6/25 Gary Gatten : > 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. Maybe you should write one! Perhaps the closest thing there is ee. Chris -- A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in a mailing list? -- A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in a mailing list? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
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 Dollansky > > > > > > wrote: > > > > >On 25 June 2009 pm 19:13:14 Konrad Heuer wrote: > > > > > > Of course, only for VT-100 Terminals. > > > > This is interesting. I learned vi on an ADM-3A, late-70's. > > this was the dream terminal of mine during those days. It has had > a decent keyboard with an acceptable screen. > > I really forgot the names of the terminals I have had to use > before. my first was just the "3", the "3A" had the addressible cursor so vi could move around. the whole thing was one unit; kybd builtin to the screen/CRT. i thought the ADM-3A was severely cool:_) gary ps: yes, i is a nerd... . > > Later I could move to Esprit 6310 models. > > Erich -- Gary Kline kl...@thought.org http://www.thought.org Public Service Unix http://jottings.thought.org http://transfinite.thought.org For FBSD list: http://transfinite.thought.org/slicejourney.php The 4.98a release of Jottings: http://jottings.thought.org/index.php ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
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, 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 > > termcap, without which there would be no vi) were written later, at > > UC Berkeley. > > > >> If you had a nice video terminal then you used vi. But if you > >> were stuck using a hard copy terminal like a Decwriter, then you > >> used ex. And ed was the simplified (dumbed down) editor for > >> newbies. > > > > More like, ed was the "original" Unix editor; ex and vi presumably > > were inspired, at least in part, by a desire to improve on ed's > > limitations. I doubt I'm the only one who muttered about the bother > > of horsing around with ed, back when there was nothing else. > > > > Ah, I didn't know that. When I started using Unix (on a BSD 4.2 system) > vi was the editor of choice. It wasn't until much later that I learned > about the ATT side of Unix. Back in 1978, Bill Joy used to walk around with a fan-fold printout of vi and/or csh. He'd pull up a chair and sit at a term a few feet away. (This was when I was first learning FORTRAN-IV and [ick] Pascal. ) He probably fixed dozrns of bugs that way, walking thru the code. --Yes, I'm sure he was trying to impress the girls too. (About a third of the intro programming classes were female, then. And not many uglies, either! (I'm not sexist or anything, just telling it like it was:) Today I'm hearing there are fewer women students into programming... dunno why.) Ken Arnold hacked the first curses and termcap. Anyway, this is the BErkeley side of Unix. ed was my first editor on the ADM. It was the next thing to magic. vi blew it out of the water. -- Gary Kline kl...@thought.org http://www.thought.org Public Service Unix http://jottings.thought.org http://transfinite.thought.org For FBSD list: http://transfinite.thought.org/slicejourney.php The 4.98a release of Jottings: http://jottings.thought.org/index.php ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
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 > > > > wrote: > > > >On 25 June 2009 pm 19:13:14 Konrad Heuer wrote: > > > > Of course, only for VT-100 Terminals. > > This is interesting. I learned vi on an ADM-3A, late-70's. this was the dream terminal of mine during those days. It has had a decent keyboard with an acceptable screen. I really forgot the names of the terminals I have had to use before. Later I could move to Esprit 6310 models. Erich ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
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 > 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 believe you. This must have been 30 years back. > > > > 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 editor of choice even those > days anymore. > > > reading the source of ed(1) and typing small programs in those > > terminals. vi(1) was available for a long time before 1993, > > but this doesn't mean other editors had died out by then :) > > If I remember right, I used something like ed only in the > Seventies. > > A collegue programmed then even a WordStar clone for RSX to have a > nice editor. > > Of course, only for VT-100 Terminals. This is interesting. I learned vi on an ADM-3A, late-70's. And, *YES*, it is in /rescue! :-D Would not just a symlink work on build? Or since it's < 3700 blocks, why not default build in in /bin too? I mean, come on, you guys... . gary > > Erich > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" -- Gary Kline kl...@thought.org http://www.thought.org Public Service Unix http://jottings.thought.org http://transfinite.thought.org For FBSD list: http://transfinite.thought.org/slicejourney.php The 4.98a release of Jottings: http://jottings.thought.org/index.php ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /binHi,
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 12:11 AM, Polytropon wrote: > On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 12:03:21 +0800, Erich Dollansky > wrote: >> What kind of editor do you need for rescue? Just edit one or two >> lines in some config file to allow the full system to start >> again. >> >> Rescue does not need an editor programmers are used to edit their >> source files. > > I won't say anything different. For the usual "maintenance and > get the damn thing working again" tasks the /rescue editor, > especially vi, should be enough. Commands are i, a, and :wq. Don't forget about dd ;) -- Glen Barber ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /binHi,
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 12:03:21 +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote: > What kind of editor do you need for rescue? Just edit one or two > lines in some config file to allow the full system to start > again. > > Rescue does not need an editor programmers are used to edit their > source files. I won't say anything different. For the usual "maintenance and get the damn thing working again" tasks the /rescue editor, especially vi, should be enough. Commands are i, a, and :wq. >From my experience, I can't remember to have used anything else. -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /binHi,
Hi, On 26 June 2009 am 10:58:08 Polytropon wrote: > On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 10:33:56 +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote: > > On 26 June 2009 am 10:02:30 Polytropon wrote: > > > Polytropon > > > From Magdeburg, Germany > > > > big brother is watching me. > > Yes, Dr. Schäuble does so. :-) > yeah, he rolls but he does not rock.. > The ee editor isn't that bad. Especially ^K and ^L are more > easy to use than vi's edit buffer equivalent. > What kind of editor do you need for rescue? Just edit one or two lines in some config file to allow the full system to start again. Rescue does not need an editor programmers are used to edit their source files. Erich ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /binHi,
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 10:33:56 +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote: > > On 26 June 2009 am 10:02:30 Polytropon wrote: > > Polytropon > > From Magdeburg, Germany > > big brother is watching me. Yes, Dr. Schäuble does so. :-) > An xterm just came up with this message: > > "The default editor in FreeBSD is vi, which is efficient to use > when you have learned it, but somewhat user-unfriendly. To use > ee (an easier but less powerful editor) instead, set the > environment variable EDITOR to /usr/bin/ee" > > Isn't this the best reasoning why it should stay as it is? The ee editor isn't that bad. Especially ^K and ^L are more easy to use than vi's edit buffer equivalent. While there's ed and ex in /rescue, ee isn't. % which ee | xargs ldd /usr/bin/ee: libncurses.so.7 => /lib/libncurses.so.7 (0x28088000) libc.so.7 => /lib/libc.so.7 (0x280c6000) Relies on ncurses, but so does dialog / sysinstall... -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /binHi,
On 26 June 2009 am 10:02:30 Polytropon wrote: > Polytropon > From Magdeburg, Germany big brother is watching me. An xterm just came up with this message: "The default editor in FreeBSD is vi, which is efficient to use when you have learned it, but somewhat user-unfriendly. To use ee (an easier but less powerful editor) instead, set the environment variable EDITOR to /usr/bin/ee" Isn't this the best reasoning why it should stay as it is? Erich ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
Hi, On 26 June 2009 am 10:02:30 Polytropon wrote: > On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 09:55:48 +0800, Erich Dollansky 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 in > maintenance mode (SUM) is often important for recovery > purposes. The OS leaves it to the admin to take such important > decisions. :-) > yes, but then he or she knows why certain things on certain places unlike those day when it has had to be on those places. > > Yes, this is the idea of the ideas. > > > > But why don't we take Microsoft Word running under wine? > > > > I mean, if we strike, we should have a real strike. > > 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 music. And > dancing puppies. > > If - then real. :-) Yes, this is the best suggestion up to date. > Polytropon > From Magdeburg, Germany Solltest Du jetzt nicht schlafen? Hier scheint wenigstens die Sonne. Erich ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 09:55:48 +0800, Erich Dollansky 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 in maintenance mode (SUM) is often important for recovery purposes. The OS leaves it to the admin to take such important decisions. :-) > > The good thing about vi - yes, there is such a thing - is the > > fact that it even works completely under the weirdest > > circumstances, e. g. if you are on a terminal line that does > > not have cursor keys or function keys, then you can still > > use the full power of vi, as long as you know how to master > > it, but that's true for anything in the UNIX world. > > > Aren't all - or at least most - of the Unix editors like this? I think most of them are. But, for example, I don't think that the mcedit (Midnight Commander's editor) is very usable without cursor and function keys... > > > But isn't there emacs in the ports too? > > > > Sure, let's take emacs into the OS, as well as any other editor > > one could imagine. And because most people like graphical > > applications, let's include OpenOffice for editing > > configuration files in maintenance mode. :-) > > Yes, this is the idea of the ideas. > > But why don't we take Microsoft Word running under wine? > > I mean, if we strike, we should have a real strike. 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 music. And dancing puppies. If - then real. :-) -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 09:50:31 +0800, Erich Dollansky 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 editor of choice even those > days anymore. Heh, true. I only later found out though, when a local admin hit me in the head with a SunOS vi manual. I've lost contact with him a long time ago, but boy am I glad he pointed me at those SunOS manuals... > If I remember right, I used something like ed only in the Seventies. Ouch! :-) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
Hi, On 26 June 2009 am 09:07:00 Polytropon wrote: > On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 08:24:13 +0800, Erich Dollansky 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. There are > many many arguments pro and contra partitioning. It's a matter > of intention. > 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. That /usr does not have to be on the same disk, is a different question. If I do this, I will also be aware of the consequences. > > > > It would be even better to have an editor like joe in > > > > /bin than anything like vi. > > > > > > Certainly. > > > > Ok, then let us support joe. > > Or the Midnight Commander's editor, mcedit. :-) > > The good thing about vi - yes, there is such a thing - is the > fact that it even works completely under the weirdest > circumstances, e. g. if you are on a terminal line that does > not have cursor keys or function keys, then you can still > use the full power of vi, as long as you know how to master > it, but that's true for anything in the UNIX world. > Aren't all - or at least most - of the Unix editors like this? > > But isn't there emacs in the ports too? > > Sure, let's take emacs into the OS, as well as any other editor > one could imagine. And because most people like graphical > applications, let's include OpenOffice for editing > configuration files in maintenance mode. :-) Yes, this is the idea of the ideas. But why don't we take Microsoft Word running under wine? I mean, if we strike, we should have a real strike. Erich ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
Hi, On 26 June 2009 am 09:06:49 Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 08:20:19 +0800, Erich Dollansky 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 believe you. This must have been 30 years back. > > 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 editor of choice even those days anymore. > reading the source of ed(1) and typing small programs in those > terminals. vi(1) was available for a long time before 1993, > but this doesn't mean other editors had died out by then :) If I remember right, I used something like ed only in the Seventies. A collegue programmed then even a WordStar clone for RSX to have a nice editor. Of course, only for VT-100 Terminals. Erich ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
-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 (PDP-11), > where it was the only editor in the distribution. ex and vi (and > termcap, without which there would be no vi) were written later, at > UC Berkeley. > >> If you had a nice video terminal then you used vi. But if you >> were stuck using a hard copy terminal like a Decwriter, then you >> used ex. And ed was the simplified (dumbed down) editor for >> newbies. > > More like, ed was the "original" Unix editor; ex and vi presumably > were inspired, at least in part, by a desire to improve on ed's > limitations. I doubt I'm the only one who muttered about the bother > of horsing around with ed, back when there was nothing else. > Ah, I didn't know that. When I started using Unix (on a BSD 4.2 system) vi was the editor of choice. It wasn't until much later that I learned about the ATT side of Unix. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkpEH+IACgkQjkAlo11skeOOrwCbBrOYlc7+bHDOgKvHiLedCQof w3AAniMByMDTGAIEbWzTd+oTNVgB6VoU =0dSg -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 08:24:13 +0800, Erich Dollansky 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. There are many many arguments pro and contra partitioning. It's a matter of intention. > > > It would be even better to have an editor like joe in /bin > > > than anything like vi. > > > > Certainly. > > > Ok, then let us support joe. Or the Midnight Commander's editor, mcedit. :-) The good thing about vi - yes, there is such a thing - is the fact that it even works completely under the weirdest circumstances, e. g. if you are on a terminal line that does not have cursor keys or function keys, then you can still use the full power of vi, as long as you know how to master it, but that's true for anything in the UNIX world. > But isn't there emacs in the ports too? Sure, let's take emacs into the OS, as well as any other editor one could imagine. And because most people like graphical applications, let's include OpenOffice for editing configuration files in maintenance mode. :-) -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 08:20:19 +0800, Erich Dollansky 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 believe you. This must have been 30 years back. As far as 16 years back, VT220/VT320 terminals were in wide use in universities. Some of us learned our first regexp stuff by reading the source of ed(1) and typing small programs in those terminals. vi(1) was available for a long time before 1993, but this doesn't mean other editors had died out by then :) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
-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. If you had a nice video terminal then you used vi. But >> if you were stuck using a hard copy terminal like a Decwriter, then you >> used ex. And ed was the simplified (dumbed down) editor for newbies. >> >> ed is an interactive program because the user "interacts" with it. You >> give it command, it does something, you give it some more commands, it >> does more stuff, etc. Interactive does not mean screen based. > > ed can be used very well non-interactively. > e.g. a script made by diff -e can be piped to it. > > Ruben > > Yes, that's true. Perhaps I misspoke myself. ed can be used both in interactive mode and in a script, which is what I called "command line mode". However it's not correct to say that ed is not an interactive program, as it definitely can be used interactively. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkpEHekACgkQjkAlo11skePV5ACcCZaOsxztyNyWIlNBuTMuL/nu FAYAnRiKFxy+nezfkA0I9Q6Nou9Sc2Ve =SEx6 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
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 vi. > my mistake. To be honest, I never have had a problem with /usr since disks are large enough to have all on only one. Of course, those days, when it was two or more disks in a system and /usr died, it could have helped. > > It would be even better to have an editor like joe in /bin > > than anything like vi. > > Certainly. > Ok, then let us support joe. But isn't there emacs in the ports too? Erich > Erik PS: according to the spelling, you originate from further north than me ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
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 30 years back. Didn't come CP/M 1.0 not even with a better editor? ed? edlin? Erich ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
I like M$ "Notepad" - is there a version of that for FBSD? Actually the old "edit" from dos is sweet too - Original Message - From: owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org To: Konrad Heuer Cc: Manish Jain ; bf1...@googlemail.com ; FreeBSD Mailing List Sent: Thu Jun 25 15:50:01 2009 Subject: Re: The question of moving vi to /bin > 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 it was mentioned, but the OP seems to have ignored or refused to acknowledge /rescue/vi which is in the / partition as it's defaulted partitioned. Why are we still talking about /usr/bin/vi (dynamically linked) when /rescue/vi (statically linked) is both in / and would work for us? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" "This email is intended to be reviewed by only the intended recipient and may contain information that is privileged and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, use, dissemination, disclosure or copying of this email and its attachments, if any, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and delete this email from your system." ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
> 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 it was mentioned, but the OP seems to have ignored or refused to acknowledge /rescue/vi which is in the / partition as it's defaulted partitioned. Why are we still talking about /usr/bin/vi (dynamically linked) when /rescue/vi (statically linked) is both in / and would work for us? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
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 that you > > > don't like it. > > > > requirements of being interactive. That's one reason. Secondly, > > how many times does an average commandline user even think of > > using ed when he needs to edit a file, even in the extreme case > > where there are no alternatives ? > > > isn't there ee in the base system? ee is in /usr/bin, just like vi. > > Till the improvements are in place, we need the alternative of > > having vi under /bin rather than /usr/bin. > > > I do not see any reason to have a monster like vi there. I agree, but for different reasons. Though I love vi(m), I realize that not everyone does. If the point of all of this is to provide an editor which can be used by just about anyone in the event that /usr is unavailable, vi will not fit the bill any more than ex will. ee is a better start, and it's conveniently 1/5 the size of vi. > > But I guess my words are of no use when the people who matter > > just won't listen. So I give any hopes in this regard. > > I hope that they do not listen. > > It would be even better to have an editor like joe in /bin than > anything like vi. Certainly. Erik ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 14:20:42 -0400, "ill...@gmail.com" wrote: > 2009/6/24 Manish Jain : > > 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. Dial all the numbers altogether to talk to the fat guy with the big hard disk. :-) -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
2009/6/24 Manish Jain : > 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. -- -- ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
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 vi. But if you were stuck using a hard copy terminal like a Decwriter, then you used ex. And ed was the simplified (dumbed down) editor for newbies. ed is an interactive program because the user "interacts" with it. You give it command, it does something, you give it some more commands, it does more stuff, etc. Interactive does not mean screen based. ed can be used very well non-interactively. e.g. a script made by diff -e can be piped to it. Ruben What I meant was the primary usage. Of course, there are many tools (ed included) which will allow non-interactive usage, and still others which can be tweaked or forced into that behaviour. The point about ed is that it does not live up to the needs of its primary mode. Somebody mentioned something about getting multi-line replacement functionality from ed that is not possible with sed. If only the gentleman would go through the documentation for a recent version of sed, he could save himself from a lot of further pain. This following link was posted a few days earlier from freebsd-questions itself : http://www.grymoire.com/Unix/Sed.html There probably isn't much to compare between freebsd and cygwin, but cygwin has dropped ed (and afaik only ed) from its base distribution not for nothing. Maybe they were concerned about the bloat factor, and for good reason in ed's case. -- Regards Manish Jain invalid.poin...@gmail.com +91-96500-10329 Laast year I kudn't spell Software Engineer. Now I are won. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
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 category of non-interactive (grep, sed, ex) or interactive (vi, wget, sysinstall). The case of non-interactive tools is simple : just do what you are told on the commandline and exit. For interactive tools, at a minimum, the application has to be show what data it is working on and what it does with the data when the user presses a key (or a series of them). ed was never meant to be non-interactive, and it does not fulfil the basic requirements of being interactive. That's one reason. Secondly, how many times does an average commandline user even think of using ed when he needs to edit a file, even in the extreme case where there are no alternatives ? There have been some recent changes: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/194628 <http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/194628> that suggest that this problem is being addressed. Till the improvements are in place, we need the alternative of having vi under /bin rather than /usr/bin. Actually, it surprises me to what extent the core of the FreeBSD community is enamoured with this idea of a micro-minimalistic base, in which it is practically impossible to do anything except run fsck. Matters don't stop there. Seeing the limitations of this approach, the community churns up wierd workarounds like /rescue/vi, when all that was needed was shift vi from /usr. You talk about the need for compliance with old hardware and embedded systems to save a few kilos. How old is the hardware that you have in mind ? The oldest system running FreeBSD I know of is a 1997 Pentium with a 2 GB disk, and even that can easily withstand the change I am suggesting. Machines older than that are actually DEAD and don't have to be factored in. As for embedded systems, the primary target of FreeBSD is servers, workstations and *tops. The embedded world hasn't survived riding on FreeBSD, nor the other way round. So from the viewpoint of the greatest good of the largest number, over-indulging a mindset fixed around minimizing the base only leads to degradation, not improvement. Getting to boast of a 900K / won't do any good when people are thinking of having decent firepower (even while in single-user mode) and its ease of use. But I guess my words are of no use when the people who matter just won't listen. So I give any hopes in this regard. 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 can learn basics of ed in less than a hour. Don't you think so? Best regards Konrad Heuer GWDG, Am Fassberg, 37077 Goettingen, Germany, kheu...@gwdg.de ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
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 stuck using a hard copy terminal like a Decwriter, then you > used ex. And ed was the simplified (dumbed down) editor for newbies. > > ed is an interactive program because the user "interacts" with it. You > give it command, it does something, you give it some more commands, it > does more stuff, etc. Interactive does not mean screen based. ed can be used very well non-interactively. e.g. a script made by diff -e can be piped to it. Ruben ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
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 tool has to clearly fall either under the category of non-interactive (grep, sed, ex) or interactive (vi, wget, sysinstall). Oh really? Many Unix programs have traditionally had both a command line mode of operation and an interactive mode, and that's still pretty much still true. Usually when you run a program you put arguments on the command line, and the program does what those arguments tell it to do. But for many programs, if you run them with no arguments they run in interactive mode and wait for the user to issue commands telling the program what to do. The case of non-interactive tools is simple : just do what you are told on the commandline and exit. For interactive tools, at a minimum, the application has to be show what data it is working on and what it does with the data when the user presses a key (or a series of them). ed was never meant to be non-interactive, and it does not fulfil the basic requirements of being interactive. That's one reason. Secondly, how many times does an average commandline user even think of using ed when he needs to edit a file, even in the extreme case where there are no alternatives ? 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 stuck using a hard copy terminal like a Decwriter, then you used ex. And ed was the simplified (dumbed down) editor for newbies. ed is an interactive program because the user "interacts" with it. You give it command, it does something, you give it some more commands, it does more stuff, etc. Interactive does not mean screen based. Till the improvements are in place, we need the alternative of having vi under /bin rather than /usr/bin. Actually, it surprises me to what extent the core of the FreeBSD community is enamoured with this idea of a micro-minimalistic base, in which it is practically impossible to do anything except run fsck. Matters don't stop there. Seeing the limitations of this approach, the community churns up wierd workarounds like /rescue/vi, when all that was needed was shift vi from /usr. You talk about the need for compliance with old hardware and embedded systems to save a few kilos. How old is the hardware that you have in mind ? The oldest system running FreeBSD I know of is a 1997 Pentium with a 2 GB disk, and even that can easily withstand the change I am suggesting. Machines older than that are actually DEAD and don't have to be factored in. As for embedded systems, the primary target of FreeBSD is servers, workstations and *tops. The embedded world hasn't survived riding on FreeBSD, nor the other way round. So from the viewpoint of the greatest good of the largest number, over-indulging a mindset fixed around minimizing the base only leads to degradation, not improvement. Getting to boast of a 900K / won't do any good when people are thinking of having decent firepower (even while in single-user mode) and its ease of use. It's not just keeping the core system small, it's ensuring that if the disk containing /usr fails to mount, then you still have enough of the system to fix the problem. Admittedly this isn't as much of a concern now, what with rescue disks and CDs with bootable live systems, but it's still nice to have. John L. Templer -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkpDDM0ACgkQjkAlo11skePG4wCgjq4plp71Yattn34UP9YIyv4k VagAoKDcLGVPQBxae6FABGa5hLI9w4gM =+Ed7 -END PGP SIGNATURE- Hi John, I really think you need to go through Unix's history again to get your facts anywhere close to reality. -- Regards Manish Jain invalid.poin...@gmail.com +91-96500-10329 Laast year I kudn't spell Software Engineer. Now I are won. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
> 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 termcap, without which there would be no vi) were written later, at UC Berkeley. > If you had a nice video terminal then you used vi. But if you > were stuck using a hard copy terminal like a Decwriter, then you > used ex. And ed was the simplified (dumbed down) editor for > newbies. More like, ed was the "original" Unix editor; ex and vi presumably were inspired, at least in part, by a desire to improve on ed's limitations. I doubt I'm the only one who muttered about the bother of horsing around with ed, back when there was nothing else. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
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 one reason. Secondly, > how many times does an average commandline user even think of > using ed when he needs to edit a file, even in the extreme case > where there are no alternatives ? > isn't there ee in the base system? > Till the improvements are in place, we need the alternative of > having vi under /bin rather than /usr/bin. > I do not see any reason to have a monster like vi there. > Actually, it surprises me to what extent the core of the > FreeBSD community is enamoured with this idea of a > micro-minimalistic base, in which it is practically impossible > to do anything except run fsck. Matters don't stop there. > Seeing the limitations of this approach, the community churns > up wierd workarounds like /rescue/vi, when all that was needed > was shift vi from /usr. You talk about the need for compliance Only people who want to use vi do this. The rest is happy with ee. > But I guess my words are of no use when the people who matter > just won't listen. So I give any hopes in this regard. I hope that they do not listen. It would be even better to have an editor like joe in /bin than anything like vi. Erich ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
-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 fall either under the category of > non-interactive (grep, sed, ex) or interactive (vi, wget, sysinstall). Oh really? Many Unix programs have traditionally had both a command line mode of operation and an interactive mode, and that's still pretty much still true. Usually when you run a program you put arguments on the command line, and the program does what those arguments tell it to do. But for many programs, if you run them with no arguments they run in interactive mode and wait for the user to issue commands telling the program what to do. > The case of non-interactive tools is simple : just do what you are told > on the commandline and exit. For interactive tools, at a minimum, the > application has to be show what data it is working on and what it does > with the data when the user presses a key (or a series of them). ed was > never meant to be non-interactive, and it does not fulfil the basic > requirements of being interactive. That's one reason. Secondly, how many > times does an average commandline user even think of using ed when he > needs to edit a file, even in the extreme case where there are no > alternatives ? 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 stuck using a hard copy terminal like a Decwriter, then you used ex. And ed was the simplified (dumbed down) editor for newbies. ed is an interactive program because the user "interacts" with it. You give it command, it does something, you give it some more commands, it does more stuff, etc. Interactive does not mean screen based. > > Till the improvements are in place, we need the alternative of having vi > under /bin rather than /usr/bin. > > Actually, it surprises me to what extent the core of the FreeBSD > community is enamoured with this idea of a micro-minimalistic base, in > which it is practically impossible to do anything except run fsck. > Matters don't stop there. Seeing the limitations of this approach, the > community churns up wierd workarounds like /rescue/vi, when all that was > needed was shift vi from /usr. You talk about the need for compliance > with old hardware and embedded systems to save a few kilos. How old is > the hardware that you have in mind ? The oldest system running FreeBSD I > know of is a 1997 Pentium with a 2 GB disk, and even that can easily > withstand the change I am suggesting. Machines older than that are > actually DEAD and don't have to be factored in. As for embedded systems, > the primary target of FreeBSD is servers, workstations and *tops. The > embedded world hasn't survived riding on FreeBSD, nor the other way > round. So from the viewpoint of the greatest good of the largest number, > over-indulging a mindset fixed around minimizing the base only leads to > degradation, not improvement. Getting to boast of a 900K / won't do any > good when people are thinking of having decent firepower (even while in > single-user mode) and its ease of use. It's not just keeping the core system small, it's ensuring that if the disk containing /usr fails to mount, then you still have enough of the system to fix the problem. Admittedly this isn't as much of a concern now, what with rescue disks and CDs with bootable live systems, but it's still nice to have. John L. Templer -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkpDDM0ACgkQjkAlo11skePG4wCgjq4plp71Yattn34UP9YIyv4k VagAoKDcLGVPQBxae6FABGa5hLI9w4gM =+Ed7 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
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 interactive (vi, wget, sysinstall). The case of non-interactive tools is simple : just do what you are told on the commandline and exit. For interactive tools, at a minimum, the application has to be show what data it is working on and what it does with the data when the user presses a key (or a series of them). ed was never meant to be non-interactive, and it does not fulfil the basic requirements of being interactive. That's one reason. Secondly, how many times does an average commandline user even think of using ed when he needs to edit a file, even in the extreme case where there are no alternatives ? There have been some recent changes: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/194628 <http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/194628> that suggest that this problem is being addressed. Till the improvements are in place, we need the alternative of having vi under /bin rather than /usr/bin. Actually, it surprises me to what extent the core of the FreeBSD community is enamoured with this idea of a micro-minimalistic base, in which it is practically impossible to do anything except run fsck. Matters don't stop there. Seeing the limitations of this approach, the community churns up wierd workarounds like /rescue/vi, when all that was needed was shift vi from /usr. You talk about the need for compliance with old hardware and embedded systems to save a few kilos. How old is the hardware that you have in mind ? The oldest system running FreeBSD I know of is a 1997 Pentium with a 2 GB disk, and even that can easily withstand the change I am suggesting. Machines older than that are actually DEAD and don't have to be factored in. As for embedded systems, the primary target of FreeBSD is servers, workstations and *tops. The embedded world hasn't survived riding on FreeBSD, nor the other way round. So from the viewpoint of the greatest good of the largest number, over-indulging a mindset fixed around minimizing the base only leads to degradation, not improvement. Getting to boast of a 900K / won't do any good when people are thinking of having decent firepower (even while in single-user mode) and its ease of use. But I guess my words are of no use when the people who matter just won't listen. So I give any hopes in this regard. -- Regards Manish Jain invalid.poin...@gmail.com +91-96500-10329 Laast year I kudn't spell Software Engineer. Now I are won. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 06:13:49 -0700 "b. f." 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 > vm.swap_idle_threshold1 > vm.swap_idle_threshold2 > etc. > > See, for example, tuning(7). These have been around for ages (well, > at least since June 1996). You can also build your kernel with: > > options NO_SWAPPING > > which takes precedence over these settings. That option has been > around even longer. Linux has corresponding features, although they > didn't always work well on older kernels. It looks like the best explanation of NO_SWAPPING is http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=1067315+0+archive/2003/freebsd-current/20030413.freebsd-current I found it after attempting to trim a powerpc kernel to see just how much I could leave out - it looks like it's not possible to leave out support for swapping. -- Bruce Cran ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: The question of moving vi to /bin
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 work normally just when > >you need it, and quickly too. > > Yes. But there have been some recent changes: > > http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/194628 > > that suggest that this problem is being addressed. That's definitely good news. There isn't much point in putting something in /rescue that won't work when other filesystems won't mount. > > >But why are we talking about a few hundred > >kilos for such a basic utility as vi in times when everyone has hundreds > >of GB's on the disk, and the / partition itself is 512 MB by default. > >The BSD concept of having vi under /usr originated when resources were > >less by a factor of thousands (<= (100 MB disks), <= (8 MB physical RAM) > >and so on). When we are well past those kind of constraints, the concept > >needs an rethink. > > No, we're not. A lot of people are still using old hardware, or > embedded hardware, where efficiency in space and computational effort > are still important, and will remain so for a while. Please don't > encourage bloat. I sympathize with the desire to keep "bloat" down for the minimal default case. Embedded systems were the first examples that came to mind for cases where having vi in /bin might not be ideal. On the other hand, I don't see any reason to refuse to offer an optional install of /bin/vi for those who prefer it and don't want to have to brute-force "install" it by manually copying it, thus eliminating relatively simple and easy upgrades when security concerns demand it. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Jon Postel, RFC 761: "[B]e conservative in what you do, be liberal in what you accept from others." pgp9tOWGypNtz.pgp Description: PGP signature
