ping Slack dev team
in [Slackware]
|
Prev: LewPitcher.ca tops Google Search!
Next: Xorg and Intel Integrated Graphics Chipset: low resolution
From: Lew Pitcher on 27 Nov 2009 13:25 Let's get that attribution straight, shall we? On November 27, 2009 13:19, in alt.os.linux.slackware, Michael Black (et472(a)ncf.ca) wrote: > On Fri, 27 Nov 2009, Roger Maynard wrote: > >> One that is new to unix/linux would have to be an imbecile to try >> and learn from slackware. > > That's why we're all "Bozos on the Bus". My favourite Firesign Theatre record. "/Paulo/! He broke the President!!" -- Lew Pitcher Master Codewright & JOAT-in-training | Registered Linux User #112576 Me: http://pitcher.digitalfreehold.ca/ | Just Linux: http://justlinux.ca/ ---------- Slackware - Because I know what I'm doing. ------
From: Lew Pitcher on 27 Nov 2009 13:39 AlanCowardHicks <ACH(a)teksavvy.com> trolled: > Aaron W. Hsu> (arcfide(a)local) wrote: >> Roger Manyard <rm(a)justlinux.ca> writes: >>>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. >> I only see ed linked against libc. > Anyway, Roger is wrong. While ed, as delivered in the Slackware > package, requires libraries, there is no reason that ed /must be/ > compiled to require libraries; it is easy enough to static link > all the required libraries directly into the binary, and have a > "stand alone" ed. Well, sure. Since you're the expert on Slackware, Alan, why don't you compile the whole distribution into one single file? If you used your 2nd language of choice, GWBASIC, you could "compile" the whole darn thing into one file using your favourite statement, the "goto", once or twice along the way... Or perhaps you would prefer to use RPG? > You can use this technique on most utilities; the only tradeoff is > that the size of the resulting binary is larger than the dynamic > linked version. Well, gee, who would have thunk that? Good thing you're here to keep us up to date, Hicks... > Many Unix and Unix-like systems provide (or provided) static > linked binaries in the /sbin and /bin directories, just to cover > the case where a sysadmin needed to fix a system that had lost > some of it's libraries. We've lost the occasional book or two over the years, but we've never managed to lose the whole darned library! What kind of fines would that produce? Of course, if you took out your GWBASIC toolkit, you could probably "compile" the entire library into one single book! cordially, as always, rm(a)justlinux.ca
From: Roger Manyard on 27 Nov 2009 13:43 Aaron W. Hsu <arcfide(a)local> trolled: > Mike Jones <Not(a)Arizona.Bay> writes: >>For this purpose, Vi not only fails dismally, but actually places the >>wannabe repair guy in a no-win situation. > If this is the situation you suggested, then they won't know about the > /etc/passwd file. This means that they will be following some guide. > This also means that they should be chrooting into their system as soon > as they can. Would these be Cuban cheroots? And is it legal to smoke these in the US? > Aaron W. Hsu How would LewPitcher pronounce "Hsu?" cordially, as always, rm
From: Lew Pitcher on 27 Nov 2009 14:01 Sylvain Robitaille <syl(a)alcor.concordia.ca> trolled: > Actually, I think you're the one who apparently insists on missing > others' points. Your point is that vi(m) is too obtuse to learn > how to use at the moment you need it most. Others have tried to > make the point that you *could* learn how to use it *before* that > moment, and spare yourself any agony. You insist on responding to > that by pointing out it's too obtuse to learn how to use when you > need it most. See the problem? Actually, the problem is that linux/unix never had an editor that was on a par with some of the great dos editors. Remember qedit? Remember the Norton Editor? That stuff was a joy to work with. > Imagine a scenario that's similar to the one you proposed, but the > system needing repair does not recognize its console. It'll talk > to you line by line, but no way would anything requiring a > screenful to display work. That happened to me many years ago. I > had two choices, really: start over (which wasn't a realistic > option at the time), or figure out on the spot how to get "ed" to > edit the file I needed. Note that "ed" ultimately works with the > same sorts of commands as vi uses, but is kind of like having a vi > perpetually in command-mode, without the benefit of screenful > display. Luckily for me, I'd gained some familiarity with vi by > that time. ... Sorry, lugan, but you are confusing ed with ex. Wouldn't it be nice to try and compile the boxer editor for linux? I emailed boxer years ago and asked if they would go linux and they said no, because everyone expected linux editors to be free. And they are. And ultimately you get what you pay for. Wouldn't the boxer editor be outstanding on a linux machine? Wouldn't wordstar be outstanding on a linux machine? How about wordperfect 5.1? How about lotus 123? Those were the days, my friend, we thought they'd never end. We'd sing and dance ... 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 27 Nov 2009 14:05
Sylvain Robitaille <syl(a)alcor.concordia.ca> trolled: > Things like reformatting lines quoted from a netnews article, without > first removing the preceding quote (">") characters, then adding them > back after formatting (highlight the lines in question, then "gq"). > Things like being able to edit a vertical block of text. Things like > sending selected text to an external command and receiving the output > back into the edit buffer. (that last one I'm sure is possible in > Emacs, and I likely even once knew how to do it, but it's something I do > quite regularly in vi/vim, without even thinking about it, and I now > don't know how to do in Emacs ...) Don't forget the history buffer on the mode line that turns vim into the best non-gui "ide" available! > There are probably many more, and many might be possible in Emacs, but I > hadn't learned how, or have long ago forgotten how. The best thing about emacs is the endless supply of toilet paper available after you print off the manual. 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 |