[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: use fcron as default scheduler in Fedora?



2008/12/9 Jerry Amundson <jamundso gmail com>:
> On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 5:12 PM, Jeff Spaleta <jspaleta gmail com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 12:38 PM, Patrice Dumas <pertusus free fr> wrote:
>>> This is in order to always have a fallback. Anybody can use anything as
>>> EDITOR, but one has to have a default. vi is not a bad choice, it is
>>> POSIX, unless I am not recalling correctly, and it is small.
>>
>>
>> Should all possible fallbacks be hard requirements? Isn't it better to
>> have a number of competing packages provide an editor and provide a
>> virtual editor provides, have one of those installed editors set as
>> the default system editor via the EDITOR variable and then have all
>> packages which need an editor require the virtual editor provides
>> instead of a specific editor?
>>
>> That way anyone can build a spin or do an install using any
>> appropriate available editor package which provides the editor virtual
>> provides as policy and tastes dictate.
>>
>> -jef
>>
>> --
>> fedora-devel-list mailing list
>> fedora-devel-list redhat com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
>>
>
> Hmm, sounds familiar... oh, right, the alternatives man page.
>
>       It is possible for several programs  fulfilling  the  same  or  similar
>       functions  to  be  installed  on a single system at the same time.  For
>       example, many systems have several  text  editors  installed  at  once.
>       This gives choice to the users of a system, allowing each to use a dif-
>       ferent editor, if desired, but makes it difficult for a program to make
>       a  good choice of editor to invoke if the user has not specified a par-
>       ticular preference.
>
>       The alternatives system aims to solve this problem.
>
> jerry
>
> --
> Store in cool, dry place. Rotate stock.
>
> --
> fedora-devel-list mailing list
> fedora-devel-list redhat com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
>

I really don't understand whats the problem with vi. It works, it's
small and it's the most common editor(in terms of availability not
usage). Even busybox has vi(or something that behaves like vi). It's
not like it's eating your precious hard disk or baby koalas. Vi is
also good for your health. You can always depend on vi to be there and
to work. It's not that I'm starting some "my editor is the best
flamewar". I'm just saying use whatever you want, but leave vi alone.
It likes to be the standard editor.

Best Regards,
Nikolay Vladimirov


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]