D
Deleted member 56028
Guest
How about adding vscode to the base?
A blind person would perhaps prefer ed to ee, he would prefer commands to menus.reduced accessibility
This is where I feel it gets hairy. Lets say someone choosesI would imagine that an additional (optional) selection “default editor/shell/pager” with an implicit package installation could make sense.
vi
, sh
, more
(so the other packages don't get installed i.e if the future PkgBase allows this). ed
, csh
, less
. These would then break giving bizarre errors.I also think that one must have first a base system, and then customise it after the install. Sysinstall allowedUnless you meant always keep those 4 base editors but add more during install. We did used to have that feature in the older sysinstall (around FreeBSD 8 and prior). It just added needless complexity when this can all be done post-install. One of the reasons bsdinstall was made to simplify it.
I don't. Once I open the EE window to edit or create the file it's no different than using Leafpad to me.Once again, why do people need to be constantly reminded of only 22 editor commands? Then, again, I don't use 22 different commands when I do every day editing in vim so does that make ee more complicated?
If it can be written on Leafpad it can be written in EE. I'll borrow some perl from Useful Scripts here in the forum, openToday we use ed in scripts, that is also not possible with vi or emacs,
perhaps also not with the so simple and non cryptic ee.
ee
in sh and save it as /usr/home/jitte/ppp_check.sh:#!/usr/bin/perl
use Net::Ping;
$server_to_ping="ya.ru";
sub check_ping_server
{
$host_alive=1;
$ping=Net::Ping->new('icmp');
if( $ping->ping($_[0]) ) { $host_alive=1;}
else {$host_alive=0;}
return $host_alive;
}
if(!check_ping_server($server_to_ping))
{
system("killall ppp");
system("sleep 2");
# Start PPP ADSL connection
system("/usr/sbin/ppp -quiet -ddial adsl");
# Send the message to
system("echo PPP restarted by timeout...");
}
exit;
(1) You are trashing the forum with unnecessary images.Now what's wrong with that, pray tell?
(1) You are trashing the forum with unnecessary images.
(2) I was not speaking about opening a script with an editor, but about calling the editor in the script.
Then tell me please what was good in the image? Why it was necessary if only few bytes text could have said the same (i.e. nothing)?Nothing unnecessary about a good image.
Are you critiquing my desktop? My skills as a graphic artist? Reprimanding me? Moderating me? Banning me from the thread? Sub-forum? Forums? Stating your opinion, like one of which everyone has? Or just being one?(1) You are trashing the forum with unnecessary images.
As to who is trashing the forums and contributing to the forums? That's up for grabs, but stats to the good are on my side. To your left, hruodr.Well, my posting was more or less irony and you knew it. "who cares today", insinuating no one, means
perhaps few, perhaps in absolute numbers lots as you say.
Thank you for clarifying that. To be brutally honest, I really had no idea what you were talking about:(2) I was not speaking about opening a script with an editor, but about calling the editor in the script.
The circumstances play a big role. The line editors were used on teletypes. On a teletype
you cannot move back and forwards, up and down with a cursor, there you cannot use vi
or emacs. Today we use ed in scripts, that is also not possible with vi or emacs,
perhaps also not with the so simple and non cryptic ee
Just pointing out that an image needs much more bytes than a little of eqivalent text, and that the forum has limited space.Are you critiquing my desktop? My skills as a graphic artist? Reprimanding me? Moderating me? Banning me from the thread? Sub-forum? Forums? Stating your opinion, like one of which everyone has? Or just being one?
That is why I wrote unnecessary images.Many programming forums even ban screenshots of code.
cat
for writing new programs (if expected to be short). Only if the program had some syntax or logic error did we switch to vi
(or another editor). Of course, you had to have a pretty good idea of what the program was supposed to do before you got started but that is a generally a good thing in any case! Even now I some time start short programs thus: > foo.c ; cc foo.c && a.out ...
but that is just out of laziness.The RAND editor had it since late '70s. It had a number of operations on rectangular selections: draw a box, erase, replace, overlay, underlay, pipe through an external program etc. I used it in preference to vi for a number of years (starting in '81 or '82). It was one of the easiest editors to teach people who were not computer savvy. While there were control-char shortcuts for common commands, pretty much every command could be executed from the command line using their easy to remember names. It also provided multiple windows (you could split any window horizontally or vertically). It had no undo command but you could abort the editor and replay your keystrokes!Emacs has rectangular cut and paste.
EVE had it in the 80s on the VAX.
Yes. I use rectangular cut and paste from time to time. My problem with emacs:Emacs has rectangular cut and paste.
# ll /usr/opt/emacs-26.3/bin/emacs-26.3
-rwxr-xr-x 1 opt opt 59986208 Jul 12 06:26 /usr/opt/emacs-26.3/bin/emacs-26.3*
# ldd /usr/opt/emacs-26.3/bin/emacs-26.3
/usr/opt/emacs-26.3/bin/emacs-26.3:
libSM.so.6 => /usr/local/lib/libSM.so.6 (0x800a31000)
libICE.so.6 => /usr/local/lib/libICE.so.6 (0x800c39000)
libX11.so.6 => /usr/local/lib/libX11.so.6 (0x800e53000)
libX11-xcb.so.1 => /usr/local/lib/libX11-xcb.so.1 (0x801199000)
libxcb.so.1 => /usr/local/lib/libxcb.so.1 (0x80139a000)
librt.so.1 => /usr/lib/librt.so.1 (0x8015c4000)
libexecinfo.so.1 => /usr/lib/libexecinfo.so.1 (0x8017ca000)
libXrandr.so.2 => /usr/local/lib/libXrandr.so.2 (0x8019cd000)
libXinerama.so.1 => /usr/local/lib/libXinerama.so.1 (0x801bd7000)
libXfixes.so.3 => /usr/local/lib/libXfixes.so.3 (0x801dd9000)
libXext.so.6 => /usr/local/lib/libXext.so.6 (0x801fde000)
libutil.so.9 => /lib/libutil.so.9 (0x8021f0000)
libncurses.so.8 => /lib/libncurses.so.8 (0x802404000)
libthr.so.3 => /lib/libthr.so.3 (0x802659000)
libm.so.5 => /lib/libm.so.5 (0x802881000)
libc.so.7 => /lib/libc.so.7 (0x802ab1000)
libXau.so.6 => /usr/local/lib/libXau.so.6 (0x802e68000)
libXdmcp.so.6 => /usr/local/lib/libXdmcp.so.6 (0x80306b000)
libelf.so.2 => /lib/libelf.so.2 (0x803270000)
libgcc_s.so.1 => /lib/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x803488000)
libXrender.so.1 => /usr/local/lib/libXrender.so.1 (0x8036a0000
Emacs has rectangular cut and paste.
Every time a new version appears, I must struggle with the configuration files in order that
it continue behaving as I know it since decades.