ping Slack dev team
in [Slackware]
|
Prev: LewPitcher.ca tops Google Search!
Next: Xorg and Intel Integrated Graphics Chipset: low resolution
From: Keith Keller on 26 Nov 2009 22:49 On 2009-11-27, Mike Jones <Not(a)Arizona.Bay> wrote: > > Except being faced with an entrance exam when looking at a barfed system > is not productive. Unless you barf your system inside the first month or so, you should know enough vi to manage by then. > Like I said, its a puzzle > game with a hidden editor built in (so I'm told). You have said this way too many times to be credible. Please read this before complaining about vim again. http://blog.interlinked.org/tutorials/vim_tutorial.html (Sadly, "elvis tutorial" didn't turn up what you might hope for from Google. So cruel.) --keith -- kkeller-usenet(a)wombat.san-francisco.ca.us (try just my userid to email me) AOLSFAQ=http://www.therockgarden.ca/aolsfaq.txt see X- headers for PGP signature information
From: Lew Pitcher on 26 Nov 2009 23:19 Mike Jones <Not(a)arizona.bay> trolled: > My point in a nutshell. I'm not a sysadmin. I'm an enthusiastic dabbler. Exactly. You are a hobbyist, as is everyone who posts to this ng who is below the age of 35. Those older than 35 probably learned unix on a real system and slackware when there were few linux alternatives. Others, like Coward Hicks, Keith Wellar, and other junior pukes, pursue slackware because they think, laughably, that learning the effectively obsolete bash shell teaches one more about the OS than learning the modern gui. We laugh at these clowns because they don't know the difference between an OS and a shell. LewPitcher(a)LewPitcher.ca -- Official Website -->> http://lewpitcher.ca/ Something to look at: -->> http://www.emusclemag.com/ Lonely in Brampton? -->> http://gaypros.meetup.com/cities/ca/on/brampton/ Peel HIV/AIDS Network -->> http://www.phan.ca/home.html
From: Lew Pitcher on 26 Nov 2009 23:22 Aaron W. Hsu <arcfide(a)local> trolled: > Eef Hartman <E.J.M.Hartman(a)tudelft.nl> writes: >>If you really wanna go minimal, look up "ed" (i.e. the stream >>editor, sed, is derived from THAT, nor from the EXtended editor >>ex). > Indeed. Actually Ed has saved me a number of times even when Vi > was available, because Vi is still a full screen editor, and > sometimes your terminal is so messed up that you can't work with > editors that aren't purely line based with almost no interface. > All installations should have ed installed. That is where you should be using ex, not ed. ed edits basic streams editor while ex is a basic text editor. Try typing "vi" from ex and ed to see the difference. LewPitcher(a)LewPitcher.ca -- Official Website -->> http://lewpitcher.ca/ Something to look at: -->> http://www.emusclemag.com/ Lonely in Brampton? -->> http://gaypros.meetup.com/cities/ca/on/brampton/ Peel HIV/AIDS Network -->> http://www.phan.ca/home.html
From: Lew Pitcher on 26 Nov 2009 23:25 Aaron W. Hsu <arcfide(a)local> trolled: > Mike Jones <Not(a)Arizona.Bay> writes: > >>Something as small as Nano = no, but Vi, which is huge (and complex) by >>comparison, is the standard? From the installation disk boot? This >>doesn't add up. > > If you want a small editor, and a minimalist installer that is quick and > easy to use, then why not look at the OpenBSD installer, which recently > had several improvements made for it, and which doesn't even include Vi, > but rather, uses ed, which is about as lightweight as you can get. ed does not use the same commands as vi or ex. That is why ex is better. Unfortunately ex is linked to vim on our system...so that kind of shatters the smaller size myth. But if your screen will only support a line editor, then ex, not ed, is your best bet. LewPitcher(a)LewPitcher.ca -- Official Website -->> http://lewpitcher.ca/ Something to look at: -->> http://www.emusclemag.com/ Lonely in Brampton? -->> http://gaypros.meetup.com/cities/ca/on/brampton/ Peel HIV/AIDS Network -->> http://www.phan.ca/home.html
From: Lew Pitcher on 26 Nov 2009 23:29
Aaron W. Hsu <arcfide(a)local> trolled: > Martin Schmitz <news(a)rmz.ath.cx> writes: > >>Mike Jones wrote: >>> Something as small as Nano = no, but Vi, which is huge (and complex) >>> by comparison, is the standard? From the installation disk boot? This >>> doesn't add up. > >>Nano is about five times bigger than standard vi (in disksize, in >>functionality vi is about 100 times "bigger"): > >>[dakini]~$ ls -l /usr/bin/nano /usr/bin/nvi >>-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 145884 2008-09-16 02:07 /usr/bin/nano >>-rwxr-xr-x 3 root root 30354 2009-04-05 15:39 /usr/bin/nvi > > Ed ought to be considered too: > > -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 49408 2009-06-12 17:01 /bin/ed* > -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 522496 2008-09-23 15:35 /usr/bin/elvis* > -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 179480 2009-05-23 00:48 /usr/bin/nano* But ed requires libraries. There are several tiny editors around that do not require a library - there is one called "q" if I recall correctly, and these are more ideal for a rescue disk. LewPitcher(a)LewPitcher.ca -- Official Website -->> http://lewpitcher.ca/ Something to look at: -->> http://www.emusclemag.com/ Lonely in Brampton? -->> http://gaypros.meetup.com/cities/ca/on/brampton/ Peel HIV/AIDS Network -->> http://www.phan.ca/home.html |