Re: Bug#155376: what is default editor in /bin
On Sun, Aug 04, 2002 at 12:08:19PM -0700, Craig Dickson wrote:
> Oohara Yuuma wrote:
> > Craig Dickson <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > > Is there any reason that nvi could not be moved to /bin and made
> > > eligible for "root default editor" status?
> > the holy war against emacs
> I'm an emacs user myself 90% of the time, but it would be obviously mad
> to move emacs to /bin.
> > Seriously, I don't care if nvi is in /bin, but it should have lower
> > priority than nano. The vi key-binding is as confusing as the dselect
> > key-binding for "I can't type without seeing the keyboard" (or worse,
> > "where's the power switch") newbies.
> I agree. It's fine with me if nano-tiny is the default /bin editor,
> but I wouldn't care to use it myself.
Same here. This thread is not about what editor we like but how
the usability of debian should be.
> Thanks to this thread, I now know that elvis-tiny goes in /bin, so I've
> installed that as my /bin editor. If something in /etc/alternatives is
> set up for "default root editor", I think both nano-tiny and elvis-tiny
> should be set up for that, with nano-tiny as the default.
Actuall nan-tiny recommended frst and elvis-tiny suggested. Also
clearer and concise explanation of objective for these package may help.
~\^o^/~~~ ~\^.^/~~~ ~\^*^/~~~ ~\^_^/~~~ ~\^+^/~~~ ~\^:^/~~~ ~\^v^/~~~ +++++
Osamu Aoki @ Cupertino CA USA