What Does it take to be an Admin.
William Shamblin
>
> In article <49tanp$p...@nyx.cs.du.edu>, j...@nyx.cs.du.edu (John Vo) wrote:
> :Hello fellow Unix users:
> :B
> :B
> :D
> :A
> : I have been using Unix for a while and think the operating system is
> :great. I need to know what does it take to be a Unix administrator, I
> :graduated with a BBA in Computer Information System. Do I have to take
> :classes? Do I have to load a Unix flaor into my computer, I've been
> :thinking of either Limux or BSD and loading them into my computer.
Three words:
coffee,coffee,coffee
Joe
P.S. Both are very good for learning Unix.
--
Joe Shamblin Give me UNIX or give me death w...@nando.net
Systems Administrator work 836.5705
New Media Department http://www.nando.net
Paul Colquhoun
:Hello fellow Unix users:
:B
:B
:D
:A
: I have been using Unix for a while and think the operating system is
:great. I need to know what does it take to be a Unix administrator, I
:graduated with a BBA in Computer Information System. Do I have to take
:classes? Do I have to load a Unix flaor into my computer, I've been
:thinking of either Limux or BSD and loading them into my computer.
What you have to do is get somebody to call you an Admin.
Actually doing it is another method. If you load UNIX on your PC and look
after it, then you are also an Admin, even if you arn't called that.
Welcome to our nightmare.
--
Paul Colquhoun Ph: +61 2 886 0938
Systems Administrator fax: +61 2 878 3877
TPG Internet email: pco...@tpgi.com.au
Unless otherwise stated, this message is NOT an official TPGi document
Sami-Pekka Hallikas
>> In article <49tanp$p...@nyx.cs.du.edu>, j...@nyx.cs.du.edu (John Vo) wrote:
>>> great. I need to know what does it take to be a Unix administrator, I
> coffee,coffee,coffee
I think I go to caffeteria to get some more coffee ... REALLY!
--
| se...@teleste.fi <A HREF="http://www.teleste.fi/~semi/">Semi's home </A> |
| MAIL MEDIA. Do Not Expose to Flame! Linux... choice of GNU generation |
| Hardware, n: The part of a computer system that can be kicked. |
| Finger me for my "geek code block"! |
Peter Svensson
Paul Colquhoun <pco...@tpgi.com.au> wrote:
>In article <49tanp$p...@nyx.cs.du.edu>, j...@nyx.cs.du.edu (John Vo) wrote:
>: I have been using Unix for a while and think the operating system is
>:great. I need to know what does it take to be a Unix administrator, I
>:graduated with a BBA in Computer Information System. Do I have to take
>:classes? Do I have to load a Unix flaor into my computer, I've been
>:thinking of either Limux or BSD and loading them into my computer.
>What you have to do is get somebody to call you an Admin.
The true sign of being an Admin is when you start dreaming about the
computers. Not daydreaming, mind you, but The Real Thing(tm) in full color
DreamVision. I have had my machines hunt me a few nights a month for some
time now.
The worst part is when you wake up and realise that the dream continues
in real life as well...
Peter Svensson
"Starting a 20-years-since-used Nova can't be _that_ hard, can it?"
Peter Gutmann
>The true sign of being an Admin is when you start dreaming about the
>computers. Not daydreaming, mind you, but The Real Thing(tm) in full color
>DreamVision. I have had my machines hunt me a few nights a month for some
>time now.
>The worst part is when you wake up and realise that the dream continues
>in real life as well...
No, the worst part is when your boss refuses to pay you overtime for all the
work you did while you were asleep.
Peter.
Robert Youd
pet...@piau.df.lth.se "Peter Svensson" writes:
> >: I have been using Unix for a while and think the operating system is
> >:great. I need to know what does it take to be a Unix administrator, I
> The true sign of being an Admin is when you start dreaming about the
> computers. Not daydreaming, mind you, but The Real Thing(tm) in full color
Talking to them in a machine room on your own is quite a good sign. You know,
the "please don't crash on me *now* because I'll be here all night and.."
<CLUNK>...
"What,.. you bastard I'll disconnect you for that, I'll ...etc etc"
I don't do this any more (honest) since a Security guard watched me for five
minutes one night.
--
Rob Youd
Hell ... is a place where nothing connects to nothing. T S Elliot.
EMACS TNA300
)In article <4a2gjj$k...@nic.lth.se>
) pet...@piau.df.lth.se "Peter Svensson" writes:
)> >: I have been using Unix for a while and think the operating system is
)> >:great. I need to know what does it take to be a Unix administrator, I
)<snip>
)> The true sign of being an Admin is when you start dreaming about the
)> computers. Not daydreaming, mind you, but The Real Thing(tm) in full color
)
)Talking to them in a machine room on your own is quite a good sign. You know,
)the "please don't crash on me *now* because I'll be here all night and.."
)<CLUNK>...
)"What,.. you bastard I'll disconnect you for that, I'll ...etc etc"
)
)I don't do this any more (honest) since a Security guard watched me for five
)minutes one night.
That's a prob? I'd continue if I were you, it's a good start on a
reputation.
--
_ _ ___ ___ _____ _ _ _
|_`'_| /_-_\ |_-_< `-_-' |_| |_.`_| --- I came, I read, I unsubscribed. ---
--- The number of the beast is not 666. The number is 95, and he is awake! ---
System Administrator
>pet...@piau.df.lth.se (Peter Svensson) writes:
>
>>The true sign of being an Admin is when you start dreaming about the
Then what is it when your dreams are kicked off by dreaming of an icon or ELM
button being clicked on ? What hurts is that I detest GUIs and use command
lines where ever possible. I gotta get off that admin mailing list.
I do not speak for any Australian Govt department or body, including my own
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE-----
GAT d +s+:+ a+ C++++ UHA++++$ P+ L !E--- W+ N++ o-- K- w !O M V---
PS+ PE Y+ PGP-- t+ !5 X-- !R tv- b++ !DI !D G e h--- r+++ y++++
------END GEEK CODE------
Eric Sorenson
MULTITASKING.
--
Eric Sorenson, er...@aloha.net - http://maxx.aloha.net/ | Reorbit Honolulu to
"The latch became a finger, touching his own" -bauhaus | make a new Redmond!
#!/bin/perl; use 'std_disclaimer.pm'; PGP key at: sore...@hookomo.aloha.net
Peter L. Berghold
>)Talking to them in a machine room on your own is quite a good sign. You know,
>)the "please don't crash on me *now* because I'll be here all night and.."
>)<CLUNK>...
>)"What,.. you bastard I'll disconnect you for that, I'll ...etc etc"
>)
>)I don't do this any more (honest) since a Security guard watched me for five
>)minutes one night.
>That's a prob? I'd continue if I were you, it's a good start on a
>reputation.
It has gotten to the point with me that my daughter did a pair of
drawings of me at work. First drawing: shows me with my coffee
machine at my elbow, coffee cup in hand, mussed up hair, looking
blearily at a terminal which is announcing "sync botch error #9 --
Call HP."
Second drawing: I'm on my feet now pointing a 12ga double barrell
shotgun at the terminal saying "I'll show you a @#$#$!! sync error!"
The scary part about it is my co-workers see nothing unusual in
this...
/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
_/ Peter L. Berghold -- Teleport Communications Group _/
_/ Sr. Unix Specialist UUCP: ..!uunet!tcgny!berghold _/
_/VOX: (718) 355-2722 INTERNET: pet...@superlink.net _/
_/ FAX: (718) 355-4248 URL: http://cnct.com/~peterb _/
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Doug McNaught
>It has gotten to the point with me that my daughter did a pair of
>drawings of me at work. First drawing: shows me with my coffee
>machine at my elbow, coffee cup in hand, mussed up hair, looking
>blearily at a terminal which is announcing "sync botch error #9 --
>Call HP."
>
>Second drawing: I'm on my feet now pointing a 12ga double barrell
>shotgun at the terminal saying "I'll show you a @#$#$!! sync error!"
GIF! GIF!
[Jpegs would be OK too...]
-Doug
--
Doug McNaught Systems Integrator Towson State University
Internet: do...@midget.towson.edu *or* mcnau...@toe.towson.edu
BITNET: e7opdam@towsonvx Office: Cook 28D, (410) 830-4148
WWW Home Page: http://www.towson.edu/~doug/
Eric Pederson
>It has gotten to the point with me that my daughter did a pair of
>drawings of me at work. First drawing: shows me with my coffee
>machine at my elbow, coffee cup in hand, mussed up hair, looking
>blearily at a terminal which is announcing "sync botch error #9 --
>Call HP."
>Second drawing: I'm on my feet now pointing a 12ga double barrell
>shotgun at the terminal saying "I'll show you a @#$#$!! sync error!"
>The scary part about it is my co-workers see nothing unusual in
>this...
About a year ago, my daughter drew a picture of me changing from an army
uniform (I'm a reservist) into civvies. My work bag was drawn nearby. I
asked her to describe the picture.
"That's you coming home from army, changing clothes to go to work."
All I could do was nod sadly.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric L. Pederson | er...@winternet.com
#include <cleverquote> | http://www.winternet.com/~eric
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vincent DiPilato
pet...@superlink.net (Peter L. Berghold) wrote:
>MAR...@angela.ctrl-c.liu.se (EMACS TNA300) wrote:
>
>
>>)Talking to them in a machine room on your own is quite a good sign. You know,
>>)the "please don't crash on me *now* because I'll be here all night and.."
>>)<CLUNK>...
>>)"What,.. you bastard I'll disconnect you for that, I'll ...etc etc"
>>)
>>)I don't do this any more (honest) since a Security guard watched me for five
>>)minutes one night.
>
>>That's a prob? I'd continue if I were you, it's a good start on a
>>reputation.
>
>It has gotten to the point with me that my daughter did a pair of
>drawings of me at work. First drawing: shows me with my coffee
>machine at my elbow, coffee cup in hand, mussed up hair, looking
>blearily at a terminal which is announcing "sync botch error #9 --
>Call HP."
>
>Second drawing: I'm on my feet now pointing a 12ga double barrell
>shotgun at the terminal saying "I'll show you a @#$#$!! sync error!"
>
>The scary part about it is my co-workers see nothing unusual in
>this...
>
Kevin Reynolds
Kevin
Tom Reingold
WHEN IN INSERT MODE, which is what the original correction asserted.
--
Tom Reingold, Some Company, Crawford | "Computers are useless. They only
Hill Laboratory, Holmdel, NJ, USA | give answers." --Pablo Picasso
to...@big.att.com |
Jon Hamilton
Tom Reingold <to...@big.att.com> wrote:
}I betcha you cannot find a version of vi in which the arrow keys work
}WHEN IN INSERT MODE, which is what the original correction asserted.
In fact, they work fine in insertion mode in vim. I didn't catch the first
part of the thread, so vi clones might not be what you're arguing about.
--
Jon Hamilton hami...@cs.iastate.edu | hami...@mixcom.com
There's plenty of youth around, what we need is a fountain of _smart_.
PGP public key available upon request
Bruce Murphy
>I betcha you cannot find a version of vi in which the arrow keys work
>WHEN IN INSERT MODE, which is what the original correction asserted.
I use one at home. Elivs uses the arror keys WHEN IN INSERT MODE.
What do I win?
Still looking for leatherman survey respones...
mail to me!
--
Packrat (BSc/BE;COSO;Wombat Admin)
Nihil illegitemi carborvndvm.
Valdis Kletnieks
>WHEN IN INSERT MODE, which is what the original correction asserted.
AIX 4.1.4
AIX 2.2.1
I'd check AIX 3.2.5 too, but that would involve telnet'ing..
/Valdis (who isn't sure that IBM 'vi' doesn't count as a clone ;)
John Peach
In article <4c0e72$k...@solaris.cc.vt.edu>, val...@black-ice.cc.vt.edu (Valdis
Kletnieks) writes:
|>In article <tommy.8...@big.att.com>,
|>Tom Reingold <to...@big.att.com> wrote:
|>>I betcha you cannot find a version of vi in which the arrow keys work
|>>WHEN IN INSERT MODE, which is what the original correction asserted.
|>
|>AIX 4.1.4
|>AIX 2.2.1
|>
|>I'd check AIX 3.2.5 too, but that would involve telnet'ing..
HP-UX 9.04
HP-UX 10.01
UnixWare 1.1.3
IRIX 5.3
|>
|>/Valdis (who isn't sure that IBM 'vi' doesn't count as a clone ;)
--
John Peach
Chevron (UK) Ltd.
Ninian House, Crawpeel Road, Altens, Aberdeen, AB1 4LG, Scotland.
Internet: ep...@aberdeen.chevron.com Phone: +44 1224 242637
Michael Meissner
writes:
| I betcha you cannot find a version of vi in which the arrow keys work
| WHEN IN INSERT MODE, which is what the original correction asserted.
I could have sworn that the System V.3 based vi I used on DG/UX many moons ago
did this.
--
Michael Meissner, Cygnus Support (East Coast)
Suite 105, 48 Grove Street, Somerville, MA 02144, USA
meis...@cygnus.com, 617-629-3016 (office), 617-629-3010 (fax)
Peter da Silva
>WHEN IN INSERT MODE, which is what the original correction asserted.
vi doesn't have an insert mode.
It has an insert *command* (i <text> ESC)
Kevin Johnson
> In article <tommy.8...@big.att.com>,
> Tom Reingold <to...@big.att.com> wrote:
> >I betcha you cannot find a version of vi in which the arrow keys work
> >WHEN IN INSERT MODE, which is what the original correction asserted.
> AIX 4.1.4
> AIX 2.2.1
> I'd check AIX 3.2.5 too, but that would involve telnet'ing..
AIX 3.2.5 works perfectly.
> /Valdis (who isn't sure that IBM 'vi' doesn't count as a clone ;)
--
Kevin Johnson
Western Geophysical Houston Marine Division email: kevin....@waii.com
Tye McQueen
to...@big.att.com (Tom Reingold) writes:
) I betcha you cannot find a version of vi in which the arrow keys work
) WHEN IN INSERT MODE, which is what the original correction asserted.
Several people have already chimed in with examples. I find that
most versions of vi allow this. Here's how. They automatically
add the following ":map!" settings (to go along with the ":map"
settings that make the arrow keys work in command mode):
up ^[OA ^[ka
down ^[OB ^[ja
left ^[OD ^[ha
right ^[OC ^[la
npage ^[[6~ ^[^Fa
ppage ^[[5~ ^[^Ba
where the second column is whatever the arrow and page up/down
keys on your current terminal send.
Now, if you want to move in insert mode and be able to use
backspace/delete to delete the previous character, that won't
work. That is why it is called INSERT mode. But if you don't
like that then what you really want is another editor.
Speaking of vi clones, nvi is better than vi, but... I've tried
many vi clones and can easilly tell that they were not written by
true vi masters. Simple things like where the cursor ends up
after an insertion are wrong (for being a vi clone) and prevent
blindingly fast editing unless you forsake real vi and get used to
the new idiosyncrasies (the "old" ones aren't necessarilly better,
they're just vi). More complex things are often missing entirely.
Luckilly I have a copy of the vi for MS-DOS that got the company
that sold it shutdown by AT&T who proved that they had used the
real vi source code (without permission). Part of the proof
involved showing how this MS-DOS vi had the same bugs, even very
obscure ones, as a particular version of Unix vi. This prevents
me from having to try more vi clones and from having to port nvi
to MS-DOS at the moment.
Back to our original subject... Note that this MS-DOS vi does not
support arrow keys in insert mode though it does support arrow
keys in command mode. Perhaps we are looking for an MS-DOS vi
that supports arrow keys in insert mode? Ah, well, not a reason
to run off and port nvi to MS-DOS as arrow keys are certainly not
much used by vi masters and never in insert mode!
--
Tye McQueen t...@metronet.com || t...@doober.usu.edu
Nothing is obvious unless you are overlooking something
http://www.metronet.com/~tye/ (scripts, links, nothing fancy)
Jerzy Tomasik
I've been using vim (VI iMproved) for quite some time on a number
of platforms, including DOS. I haven't run into any compatibility
problems yet. It's supports arrow keys in insert mode quite nicely,
without tying you to a specific keyboard.
-Jerzy
Peter da Silva
There is no insert mode in VI, just an insert command.
There are VIs set up with macros such that when you hit a cursor key,
they terminate the current command, move, and start a new insert command.
Phil Edwards
it seems Peter da Silva (pe...@bonkers.taronga.com) sez:
+ Again...
+ There is no insert mode in VI, just an insert command.
From OSF/1's vi(1) page:
Editing Modes
The vi editor has the following operational modes:
Command mode
When you start the vi editor, it is in Command mode. Any subcommand
can be entered from this mode, except commands that can only be used in
the Text Input mode (those subcommands that make corrections during
text insertion). When subcommands and the other modes end, vi returns
to Command mode. Pressing the <Esc> key cancels a partial subcommand.
Text Input mode
Entered by the a, A, i, I, o, O, cx (where x represents the scope of
the subcommand), C, s, S, and R subcommands. After entering one of
these commands, you can enter text into the editing buffer at the
current cursor position. To return to Command mode, press <Esc> for
normal exit or press the Interrupt key sequence to end abruptly.
Last Line mode
Some subcommands (those with the prefix : (colon), / (slash), ? (ques-
tion mark), or !!) read input on a line displayed at the bottom of the
screen. When you enter the initial character, vi places the cursor at
the bottom of the screen, where you enter the remaining characters of
the command. Press <Return> to perform the subcommand and enter the
Interrupt key sequence to cancel it.
+ There are VIs set up with macros such that when you hit a cursor key,
+ they terminate the current command, move, and start a new insert command.
The OSF/1 version of vi allows movement with the cursor keys in
input mode. IMHO, it's a Bad Thing to get used to if you're a
sysadmin, because someday you'll be working on a machine which
doesn't have it, and you'll be forever swearing...
Luck++;
Phil
--
#include<std/disclaimer.h> The gods do not protect fools. Fools
finger pedw...@gamma.cs.wright.edu are protected by more capable fools.
email pedw...@valhalla.cs.wright.edu -Larry Niven
Curt Sampson
Phil Edwards <pedw...@valhalla.cs.wright.edu> wrote:
>From OSF/1's vi(1) page:
>
> Editing Modes
>
> The vi editor has the following operational modes:
Actually, I don't know that that particular manual page is quite
accurate. Vi works all right for me, but I've been informed by
one of my users that vi has only two modes. The first is insert
mode, as described above. The second is `beep' mode, where any key
you type produces a `beep'.
But honestly, I've been using vi since 1983, and I just can't
understand how anybody couldn't realise that it's the best editor
in the world for touch typists (though I must admit it's not so
hot with a Dvorak keyboard). For that alone Bill Joy is one of my
personal heros.
cjs
--
Curt Sampson cu...@portal.ca Info at http://www.portal.ca/
Internet Portal Services, Inc.
Vancouver, BC (604) 257-9400 De gustibus, aut bene aut nihil.
Curt Sampson
Tye McQueen <t...@fohnix.metronet.com> wrote:
>Luckilly I have a copy of the vi for MS-DOS that got the company
>that sold it shutdown by AT&T who proved that they had used the
>real vi source code (without permission).
This seems odd. Vi (and ex, for that matter) was written at Berkeley
by Bill Joy. I shouldn't think there'd be any AT&T code in it.
Andrew Carey
: I betcha you cannot find a version of vi in which the arrow keys work
: WHEN IN INSERT MODE, which is what the original correction asserted.
Nvi does this, although not as well as it could be.
--
Andy Carey car...@peak.org
Your excuse is: disks spinning backwards - toggle the hemisphere jumper
Peter da Silva
>it seems Peter da Silva (pe...@bonkers.taronga.com) sez:
>+ Again...
>+ There is no insert mode in VI, just an insert command.
>From OSF/1's vi(1) page:
The manual's wrong.
>+ There are VIs set up with macros such that when you hit a cursor key,
>+ they terminate the current command, move, and start a new insert command.
>The OSF/1 version of vi allows movement with the cursor keys in
>input mode.
No it doesn't. It has a macro that generates "<ESC>[hjkl]a", terminating
the current command, moving, and starting a new insert command.
Try hitting "." (repeat last *command*) afterwards.
Snowhare
Nothing above this line is part of the signed message.
In article <4c2mmq$1...@cynic.portal.ca>, Curt Sampson <cu...@portal.ca> wrote:
>In article <4c1ul6$7...@alpha.wright.edu>,
>
>But honestly, I've been using vi since 1983, and I just can't
>understand how anybody couldn't realise that it's the best editor
>in the world for touch typists (though I must admit it's not so
>hot with a Dvorak keyboard). For that alone Bill Joy is one of my
>personal heros.
It's not bad and being able to do regex search and replace is great, but
I think the fundamental objection I have is the extreme modalism of vi.
You are always popping in and out of modes because you can't do what you
want in the mode you are in. Macro hiding of the mode changes helps, but
their widespread use indicate that vi simply does not map very well into
people's expectations of how an editor *should* behave.
Many of the claimed 'touch typist power features' are really historical
hacks for keyboards without cursor move keys. As a touch typist
myself, what *really* screws me up is having to remember that vi
_doesn't_ work well with the cursor move and text editting keys
that nearly every screen oriented editor in the world uses.
vi is a line oriented editor pretending to be a screen oriented editor,
and it jars when it doesn't actually behave as a screen oriented editor
would.
Benjamin Franz
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQCVAwUBMOVumOjpikN3V52xAQH1IAQAm4c6XJE9uXywtpsZoAdKouNjOzjzLHEL
dKLpLCBSIUzAhk2lDXFDxJqn1SjsMMmKYKK8hWuoUTswFfTWH6swDRQ4G+BwzJXj
h/Xoaj1IBhaHBy4TOEQhTYECXNZ07gGqWhhEUicJcZt++Qb7srHCyfUNoqc8Yyya
FdmN9N0hamU=
=rUCU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Peter da Silva
>This seems odd. Vi (and ex, for that matter) was written at Berkeley
>by Bill Joy. I shouldn't think there'd be any AT&T code in it.
Sure. they were based on "ed".
Mike D. Kail
|> In article <tommy.8...@big.att.com>,
|> >I betcha you cannot find a version of vi in which the arrow keys work
|> >WHEN IN INSERT MODE, which is what the original correction asserted.
|>
|>
|> It has an insert *command* (i <text> ESC)
huh?
vi Modes
Command Normal and initial mode. Other modes return
to command mode upon completion. ESC
(escape) is used to cancel a partial command.
Input Entered by setting any of the following
options: a A i I o O c C s S R. Arbitrary
text may then be entered. Input mode is nor-
^^^^^^^^^^^^
mally terminated with ESC character, or,
abnormally, with an interrupt.
--
/*----------------------------------------------------------*/
/* Mike D. Kail | voice: (619) 793-3359 */
/* System Administrator | fax: (619) 793-2950 */
/* FIRST VIRTUAL Holdings Inc. | e-mail: mdk...@fv.com */
/*----------------------------------------------------------*/
Michael T Pins
Or, to be more exact: vi was (is?) nothing more than a Visual Interface to
ex, ex is a superset of ed, ed is from Bell Labs.
--
*************************************************************************
* Michael Pins | Internet: mtp...@isca.uiowa.edu *
* #include <std.disclaimer> | -or- mtp...@winternet.com *
*************************************************************************
Curt Sampson
Snowhare <snow...@xmission.xmission.com> wrote:
>...I think the fundamental objection I have is the extreme modalism of vi.
>You are always popping in and out of modes because you can't do what you
>want in the mode you are in.... As a touch typist
>myself, what *really* screws me up is having to remember that vi
>_doesn't_ work well with the cursor move and text editting keys
>that nearly every screen oriented editor in the world uses.
How fast do you type? I find it much quicker to switch modes than
I do to take my fingers out of home row position, move to the arrow
keys, move about, and go back to the home position again. I don't
believe that vi involves more keystrokes, either, since the
disadvantage of having to switch modes frequently (one keystroke)
is negated by the advantage of much less frequent use of shift and
meta keys and whatnot.
I type about 90 wpm. I suspect that I wouldn't find arrow keys nearly
as much hassle at 50 wpm.
Snowhare
Nothing above this line is part of the signed message.
In article <4c4gt7$8...@cynic.portal.ca>, Curt Sampson <cu...@portal.ca> wrote:
>I do to take my fingers out of home row position, move to the arrow
>keys, move about, and go back to the home position again. I don't
>believe that vi involves more keystrokes, either, since the
>disadvantage of having to switch modes frequently (one keystroke)
Usually at least four keystrokes: <esc><newmode>stuff<esc><oldmode>
>is negated by the advantage of much less frequent use of shift and
>meta keys and whatnot.
Have to disagree with that. Meta, shift and control are 'chorded' and so
don't take any more time than single key strokes. Mode changes are perforce
sequential in execution. For example, in pico to save while I am typing I
press, ^o<return>. In vi I press <esc>:w<return>i. Five sequential
keystrokes (including one reach that pulls *all* the fingers on my left
hand off the home keys) and three mode changes vs two chorded keystrokes
and two mode changes to achieve the same result.
This is not to take away from vi's useful features when programming -
but it is definitely far from my first choice for doing things
like writing Usenet articles.
>I type about 90 wpm. I suspect that I wouldn't find arrow keys nearly
>as much hassle at 50 wpm.
I type around 60 wpm when working locally. On the modem it drops
significantly due to the burstiness of my home connection (noisy phone
lines). That is when mode changes *really* start to drive me crazy.
What I find to be a hassle is not the time it takes to reach the arrow
keys (that is done entirely unconsciously) but the screwing up caused by
having vi function differently than anything else I use. I have to
frequently reposition my fingers because they are in the wrong place (as a
result of the unconsious repositioning of my fingers over the arrow keys).
Benjamin Franz
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQCVAwUBMOXYbOjpikN3V52xAQERXQQAhP7mNKZxR/WMTtnvNmSedWE+ZhfIyrQr
iSIIjM7T10sZY0mE/URRDhfFHhQr8vIzDboNPYW6sp68S0sGzeXUcg79NxxvqNCc
NGQ21Frcr403NXyFcBuTLfQGqYUkkb9RHQ/WneuIqWqIh7G3YKjx5zaawriM/73t
dFpYuNNkVZ0=
=0ZQy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Jeff Mercer
>Valdis Kletnieks (val...@black-ice.cc.vt.edu) wrote:
>>Tom Reingold <to...@big.att.com>wrote:
>>>I betcha you cannot find a version of vi in which the arrow keys work
>>>WHEN IN INSERT MODE, which is what the original correction asserted.
>>AIX 2.2.1
>>I'd check AIX 3.2.5 too, but that would involve telnet'ing..
>AIX 3.2.5 works perfectly.
Oh boy, did you just step in it bigtime...
rif...@afn.org : No good deed goes unpunished.
Jeff The Riffer :
Drifter... :
Homo Postmortemus :
Peter da Silva
Snowhare <snow...@xmission.xmission.com> wrote:
>I think the fundamental objection I have is the extreme modalism of vi.
There. Are. Only. Two. Modes. To. VI.
Full screen and line mode.
(unless you count open mode)
>You are always popping in and out of modes because you can't do what you
>want in the mode you are in. Macro hiding of the mode changes helps,
Nope, it hurts. It keeps you from understanding how VI works.
>vi is a line oriented editor pretending to be a screen oriented editor,
vi is a *command* oriented editor. You give it commands, like teco. It just
happens to display changes sooner. Think of it as teco with better feedback
and you'll be much happier.
(sigh)
I thought at least sysadmins would grok VI.
(down, not across)
Doug McNaught
>Have to disagree with that. Meta, shift and control are 'chorded' and so
>don't take any more time than single key strokes. Mode changes are perforce
>sequential in execution. For example, in pico to save while I am typing I
^^^^
Y'know, it's hard to take seriously someone who uses that particular
'editor'... :)
>press, ^o<return>.
--
Doug McNaught Systems Integrator Towson State University
Internet: do...@midget.towson.edu *or* mcnau...@toe.towson.edu
BITNET: e7opdam@towsonvx Office: Cook 28D, (410) 830-4148
WWW Home Page: http://www.towson.edu/~doug/
Rich Holland
>AIX 4.1.4
>AIX 2.2.1
[...]
>/Valdis (who isn't sure that IBM 'vi' doesn't count as a clone ;)
I'm not sure I'd even go so far as to count it as a 'clone' if it's something
from AIX. ;-)
--
Rich Holland UNIX System Administrator, Porting Center
vox: (415) 694-4155 Synopsys, Inc. Building C
fax: (415) 965-8637 700 E. Middlefield Rd, Mountain View, CA 94043-4033
char*p="char*p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
snow...@devilbunnies.org
Peter da Silva <pe...@bonkers.taronga.com> wrote:
>In article <4c3qro$3...@xmission.xmission.com>,
>Snowhare <snow...@xmission.xmission.com> wrote:
>>I think the fundamental objection I have is the extreme modalism of vi.
>
>There. Are. Only. Two. Modes. To. VI.
>
>Full screen and line mode.
>
>(unless you count open mode)
If you want to get nitpicky the only two 'modes' are command mode and
text entry mode. But that is really not true because it is like
saying people only exist in two modes: driving cars and not driving cars.
Clearly the granularity of the definition of 'mode' used is far too coarse
(and even borders on tautological).
Even a casual perusal of the 'options' tells you that vi has not just
two, but dozens of real modes. They just aren't *called* modes.
>>You are always popping in and out of modes because you can't do what you
>>want in the mode you are in. Macro hiding of the mode changes helps,
>
>Nope, it hurts. It keeps you from understanding how VI works.
>
>>vi is a line oriented editor pretending to be a screen oriented editor,
>
>vi is a *command* oriented editor. You give it commands, like teco. It just
>happens to display changes sooner. Think of it as teco with better feedback
>and you'll be much happier.
Fair enough.
>(sigh)
>
>I thought at least sysadmins would grok VI.
>(down, not across)
Maybe I should tell you my story about being gotten up at 2am because
*multiple* operators were unable to find the 'CAPSLOCK' key on a
fairly standard keyboard (with directions) and couldn't operate a
program as a result.
Then again...
--
Benjamin Franz
Jonathan. H. N. Chin
>Full screen and line mode.
>(unless you count open mode)
Well, there may not be an `insert' mode but ex does have
a `text insertion' mode, and although the vi introduction
is a bit loose with its use of language, it does mention
an `input' mode:
=> Ex Reference Manual
=> Version 3.5/2.13 - September, 1980
=>
=> William Joy
=>
=> Revised for versions 3.5/2.13 by
=> Mark Horton
[...]
=> 4. Editing modes
=>
=> Ex has five distinct modes. The primary mode is com-
^^^^ ----
=> mand mode. Commands are entered in command mode when a `:'
----------
=> prompt is present, and are executed each time a complete
=> line is sent. In text input mode ex gathers input lines and
---------------
=> places them in the file. The append, insert, and change
=> commands use text input mode. No prompt is printed when you
=> are in text input mode. This mode is left by typing a `.'
=> alone at the beginning of a line, and command mode resumes.
=>
=> The last three modes are open and visual modes, entered
---- ------------
=> by the commands of the same name, and, within open and
=> visual modes text insertion mode. Open and visual modes
-------------------
=> allow local editing operations to be performed on the text
=> in the file. The open command displays one line at a time
=> on any terminal while visual works on CRT terminals with
=> random positioning cursors, using the screen as a (single)
=> window for file editing changes. These modes are described
=> (only) in An Introduction to Display Editing with Vi.
=> An Introduction to Display Editing with Vi
=>
=> William Joy
=>
=> Revised for versions 3.5/2.13 by
=> Mark Horton
[...]
=> 8.5. More about input mode
=>
=> There are a number of characters which you can use to
=> make corrections during input mode. These are summarized in
=> the following table.
-jonathan
--
Jonathan H N Chin, 2 kyu | Cybernetics / CompSci | "Respondeo, etsi mutabor"
| University of Reading |
shr...@reading.ac.uk | Reading, RG6 6AY, UK | < Rosenstock-Huessy >
cyb...@cyber.rdg.ac.uk | TEL:(+44) 1734 318612 |
Peter da Silva
>If you want to get nitpicky the only two 'modes' are command mode and
>text entry mode.
Text entry mode doesn't exist. It's a fiction created to describe the state
between the beginning of an input command and the end.
It's not a mode. You type a command, just like in teco: "i<a bunch of text>ESC"
except that unlike teco it gives you some feedback as to what the final
version of the buffer will look like after the command is completed.
If you think of it as a command it just makes a lot more sense. Think about
the fact that you can't back up over the beginning of the input text, or
move the cursor arbitrarily in the buffer without weirdness. Think about
the semantics of "repeat last command" and "undo". Think about applying a
count to an insert. It's REALLY weird as a mode, but makes sense as a command.
(try typing "3isome text<cursor-up><ESC>u" then doing it again with *two*
cursor-ups)
>Even a casual perusal of the 'options' tells you that vi has not just
>two, but dozens of real modes. They just aren't *called* modes.
So does any editor, including the most "modeless". Really... why do you
think they call them "modal dialogs"?
Phil Edwards
it seems Peter da Silva (pe...@bonkers.taronga.com) sez:
+ >From OSF/1's vi(1) page:
+
+ The manual's wrong.
Oh. Okay. Here DEC has been creating good code for years and years,
and da Silva can single-handedly authoritatively decree that the tech
writers are completely around the bend. Sorry, sir, I just lost what
respect I (honestly) had for you.
Can we at least agree that vi has two different "feelies"? One feely
where you press the little buttons and things appear on the screen, and
another feely where you press the little buttons and the other thing
just moves around and does stuff? Regardless of what "mode" one is in?
Luck++;
Phil
(I would go back to network programming, but how can I now that
the accuracy of the man pages is in doubt? I'll just have to go
back to experimenting! Lord help me- I'll be just like one of
the original computer scientists!)
Sheesh.
Peter da Silva
Phil Edwards <pedw...@valhalla.cs.wright.edu> wrote:
>Oh. Okay. Here DEC has been creating good code for years and years,
Well, maybe. I haven't been super-impressed by most DEC software, but
OSF/1 has proven to be a significant exception to the rule so far.
>and da Silva can single-handedly authoritatively decree that the tech
>writers are completely around the bend.
Yep. The author of vi is wrong, too.
>Sorry, sir, I just lost what respect I (honestly) had for you.
That's a silly thing to lose it over. I'm sure you can find a MUCH better
excuse if you really tried. I'm not like a stealth candidate or anything.
>Can we at least agree that vi has two different "feelies"?
No, because if you think that way it's harder to use VI. VI makes a LOT
more sense if you realise that insert is a command with an argument that's
the text you type in before the escape.
>(I would go back to network programming, but how can I now that
>the accuracy of the man pages is in doubt? I'll just have to go
>back to experimenting!
Yep. The only authoritative documentation is the source code. You can't
even depend on the comments. I honestly thought everyone knew that.
Peter deFriesse
Doug McNaught <do...@pluto.towson.edu> wrote:
>In article <4c4lar$n...@xmission.xmission.com> snow...@xmission.xmission.com (Snowhare) writes:
>
> ^^^^
>Y'know, it's hard to take seriously someone who uses that particular
>'editor'... :)
>
'Twas a bastard to compile on OSF/1 (DEC).
--
peter defriesse * any opinions expressed in this e-mail
assistant operations manager * message or news article are solely those
university computing services * of the author i do not editorialize for
umass amherst 01003 * oit umass or the commonwealth of mass
Snowhare
Nothing above this line is part of the signed message.
In article <DKHKz...@bonkers.taronga.com>,
Peter da Silva <pe...@bonkers.taronga.com> wrote:
You depend on source code before it has been mangled^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hcompiled
for execution?
And I thought you were a programmer...
"Real programmers don't use assemblers. They write microcode
directly from the maintainance panel, the way god intended."
Benjamin Franz
Who once emulated a complete microcoded 16 bit multiply operation on paper.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQCVAwUBMOg1RujpikN3V52xAQGhWwP9G2yR+uSOo5m/6RTS0vkYtW+ATRnHAU8P
y2cdBUMTl2rHktO/nEBnn/tbeFK8csj/D/m7KWvxAwAG+wtyAqj5iLsCEZlDMCuK
6rpPQW3Ie0ZiMsfTDsBBHIhvJGZJdJzzbg0nsK9bS1NYU1sORJN4sCmQg5pFqWva
c8iA6nGtG0k=
=OvB7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Peter da Silva
Snowhare <snow...@xmission.xmission.com> wrote:
>You depend on source code before it has been mangled^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hcompiled
>for execution?
Compiled?
Oh, you mean toggling it in from the green coding pad, right?
Phil Edwards
it seems Peter da Silva (pe...@bonkers.taronga.com) sez:
+ In article <4c9cgg$p...@xmission.xmission.com>,
+ Snowhare <snow...@xmission.xmission.com> wrote:
+ >You depend on source code before it has been mangled^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hcompiled
+ >for execution?
+
+ Compiled?
+
+ Oh, you mean toggling it in from the green coding pad, right?
Whaddya mean, "toggling"?? I had to write my last program by unfolding
some paper clips, connecting them together, running one end into the
serial port, and tapping the other end with a battery to produce
streams of 1s and 0s. Dunno 'bout this "toggling" and "compiling"
stuff.
(I feel lucky, too. When I was still working on MeSsyDOS, I had to do
COPY CON > PROGRAM.EXE to input my microcode. *whew*)
Luck++;
Phil
Peter deFriesse
Andrew Carey <car...@CSOS.ORST.EDU> wrote:
>Tom Reingold (to...@big.att.com) wrote:
>: I betcha you cannot find a version of vi in which the arrow keys work
>: WHEN IN INSERT MODE, which is what the original correction asserted.
>
>
telnet connection, but it has a timeout y'all can set to compensate.
It's usually the first or second thing I put on new systems.
I'm actually thinking of telling my users on April 1, 1996 that
emacs is banned as a _resource_hog. <*snicker*>
"> :ver
"> ELVIS 1.8pl4, by Steve Kirkendall (27 June 1994) [More...]
"> This version of ELVIS is freely redistributable.
Bruce Murphy
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Nothing above this line is part of the signed message.
>In article <4c2mmq$1...@cynic.portal.ca>, Curt Sampson <cu...@portal.ca> wrote:
>>In article <4c1ul6$7...@alpha.wright.edu>,
>>
>>But honestly, I've been using vi since 1983, and I just can't
>>understand how anybody couldn't realise that it's the best editor
>>in the world for touch typists (though I must admit it's not so
>>hot with a Dvorak keyboard). For that alone Bill Joy is one of my
>>personal heros.
>It's not bad and being able to do regex search and replace is great, but
>I think the fundamental objection I have is the extreme modalism of vi.
>You are always popping in and out of modes because you can't do what you
>want in the mode you are in. Macro hiding of the mode changes helps, but
>their widespread use indicate that vi simply does not map very well into
>people's expectations of how an editor *should* behave.
_but_ as vi was there first, it could hardly conform to standards
that didn't exist at the time. Shoot the people who invented the full
screen thing if you ask me.....
(Of course I use edlin/vi/edit/emacs)
BTW does anyone *else* remember the vi vs the rest of the editing
world (with WP5.1 a reluctant ally) thread on some of the funnier
(because people took them seriously) Win95 groups?
<snip>
--
Packrat (BSc/BE;COSO;Wombat Admin)
Nihil illegitemi carborvndvm.
Nick Cuccia
Peter da Silva <pe...@bonkers.taronga.com> wrote:
>Yep. The only authoritative documentation is the source code. You can't
>even depend on the comments. I honestly thought everyone knew that.
Indeed. That the only comments in Bill Joy's code were for things that
*haven't* been added or fixed has been common knowledge (at least around
Berkeley) for years...
--Nick
--
==============================================================================
Nick Cuccia -- Brewer. Singer. Photographer. Geek.
cuc...@talamasca.com http://www.talamasca.com/~cuccia/
Everything is propaganda for what you believe in actually.. -- Dorothea Lange
Peter da Silva
Phil Edwards <pedw...@valhalla.cs.wright.edu> wrote:
>Whaddya mean, "toggling"?? I had to write my last program by unfolding
>some paper clips, connecting them together, running one end into the
>serial port, and tapping the other end with a battery to produce
>streams of 1s and 0s. Dunno 'bout this "toggling" and "compiling"
>stuff.
*SERIAL PORT*?
My friend, systems old enough to be worth bragging about implemented
serial I/O by toggling the voltage levels in software, using busy-loops
for timing. There was no "serial port".
You booted them by hand, toggling in the code to core memory (you know,
real bits you can see... and bits that didn't go away when you stopped
looking at them) to load the rest of the software.
(geeze, nothing worse than fake nostalgia... next thing you know we'll be
back to "we didn't even have 0s. we had to use the letter O", and "well,
we had to bang stars together to make our own silicon by nuclear fusion")
5150
>back to "we didn't even have 0s. we had to use the letter O", and "well,
>we had to bang stars together to make our own silicon by nuclear fusion")
The Big Bang? I debugged that.
5150
--
And all that's left of me
is slight insanity
Peter Gutmann
>The Big Bang? I debugged that.
And you'll admit it in public?
ObASR: None really, except that for the first time in a week I'm planning to
go to bed before 7am. I hate it when you hit the switch to turn the
light off as you go to bed and then realise that it's already off.
Peter.
Charlie Stross
pedw...@valhalla.cs.wright.edu (Phil Edwards) wrote:
>With <DKEMs...@bonkers.taronga.com>,
>it seems Peter da Silva (pe...@bonkers.taronga.com) sez:
>+ The manual's wrong.
>
>Oh. Okay. Here DEC has been creating good code for years and years,
>and da Silva can single-handedly authoritatively decree that the tech
>writers are completely around the bend.
Yeah, this is quite accurate. There's something about UNIX which rots
the minds of otherwise highly-competent technical authors in a matter
of months, sort of like the effect of seawater on automobile bodies.
I'm still not sure quite what this effect is, but I've spent an awfully
long time investigating it (from the inside of SCO's technical publications
department, if you must know), and have come to a simple conclusion:
understanding UNIX is like learning a foreign language. Unfortunately
the deep grammar required by UNIX is subtly different from and incompatible with English, the primary language of most tech authors. As tech authors
need to be able to translate between the two languages, the further into
UNIX-land they get the less capable of communicating their experiences
they become.
Look at me. Three and a half years of writing man pages has turned me
into an obligate Perl hacker who can barely string two sentences together
without splitting infinitives, verbing nouns, passing variable length
parameter lists, and drooling. It's sad, I tell you. (And if you'd ever
seen the state of those BSD man pages before and after they passed through
my hands you'd maybe understand ...)
-- Charlie "quite mad! bwahahahahah!" Stross
Peter da Silva
Charlie Stross <cha...@antipope.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>Yeah, this is quite accurate. There's something about UNIX which rots
>the minds of otherwise highly-competent technical authors in a matter
>of months, sort of like the effect of seawater on automobile bodies.
It's not UNIX. It's computers in general.
For years I used RSX-11/M for real-time work (and it was not bad once I
implemented all the stuff from Software Tools), and we used to complain about
DEC's write-only documentation. Then came the VAX and the Orange Wall. And
of course there's all the small computer manuals that go on for five pages
with "this is a power cord" and don't tell you what "A20 gate enable" means.
The Amiga manuals were a weird mix of too dumb and too techy, but I guess
that way they hit the nail on the head for some people some of the time. It
was nice that until the 3000 at least they contained schematics. The gaps
in the exec documentation were fatal.
I have the original Macintosh, from back when they were still claiming
you don't *need* a manual. So you got Inside Macintosh (Promotional Edition).
Eek!
Then there's things like Bookreader and Answerbook and all the other useless
ungreppable electronic documentation that everyone's coming out with now.
AIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!
I.Dobbie
Then there's things like Bookreader and Answerbook and all the other useless
ungreppable electronic documentation that everyone's coming out with now.
AIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!
Rubbish they are perfectly grepable. Start them up, wait 3 weeks then do a
vgrep on the screen. No problem you see.
Oh you mean like a normal grep, and you want the asnwer quickly. Well maybe
you are right then. Got to say that I use answerbook as infrequently as
possible but they seem to have made it compulsary for some things, ever looked
at the sunos man page for format(8) it doesnt actully tell you anything except
that the program is to low level format and partition a disk. Very helpful but
I actually want to know how to do it. Wait 15 mins while I start up answerbook
AGAGGHHHHH!
Ian
John Vaughan
>You had it easy... The stars hadn't even formed yet... We had to make our own
>silicon by taking the proper number of electrons, neutrons and protons, and
>slamming them together!
Pah!
_We_ had to create a whole flipping universe, with the right physical
constants and tweakings of physics to actually get protons and neutrons and
so on to form so we _could_ make silicon...
Oh shit, that means it's all my fault....
Oh well, nothing new there...
--
John Vaughan (jo...@tcp.co.uk) | http://www.tcp.co.uk/
Technical & Sales Support | Tel: (01703) 393392
Total Connectivity Providers Ltd., PO Box 454, Southampton, SO16 3WR
"don't open your eyes - you won't like what you see" - NiN
Peter Bierman
snow...@xmission.xmission.com (Snowhare) wrote:
> "Real programmers don't use assemblers. They write microcode
> directly from the maintainance panel, the way god intended."
>
> Benjamin Franz
> Who once emulated a complete microcoded 16 bit multiply operation on paper.
Oh, you think you're tough? One of the entry level CS classes at
UW-Madison requires students to multiply IEEE-Floating Point numbers in
binary, by hand.
And I thought there was a *reason* people invented computers.
-pmb
--
<A HREF="mailto:Lun...@cs.wisc.edu">Mail me</A>
<A HREF="http://dax.cs.wisc.edu">My page<A>
Snowhare
Nothing above this line is part of the signed message.
In article <hpa.30e8c5cc....@freya.yggdrasil.com>,
H. Peter Anvin <h...@storm.net> wrote:
>Followup to: <4c9cgg$p...@xmission.xmission.com>
>By author: snow...@xmission.xmission.com (Snowhare)
>In newsgroup: alt.sysadmin.recovery
>>
>> "Real programmers don't use assemblers. They write microcode
>> directly from the maintainance panel, the way god intended."
>>
>> Benjamin Franz
>> Who once emulated a complete microcoded 16 bit multiply operation on paper.
>>
>
>Aren't you confusing machine code with microcode here? There are very
>few computers around which you can change the microcode for.
>Actually, a lot of computers no longer use microcode -- I don't think
>*any* RISC machines do.
Nope. I spoke accurately. Lets just say the US Navy has some very
odd ideas as to what constitutes 'modern' computer hardware
The computer involved can have microcode executed directly
from the maintenance panel (although not permanently stored).
And as a matter of fact - it *does* operate on core memory.
And has 'little blinking lights'.
The computer is *still* in widespread use in the Navy.
I saw four new ones installed in 1991. I was trained on this
monstrosity in 1989 and had to maintain two of them for
four years.
>[Who once wrote an emulation of a PDP-11 CPU subset -- the microcode
>fit in 256 microwords each which had 50-odd bits. Writing microcode
>is ugly, since each microword can contain several different
>operations, and you have to make sure they don't conflict.]
Yup.
Benjamin Franz
ObMilitary: The military MIL-SPEC-188C (serial) is identical to,
RS-232C with one itsy-teeny little difference. They
inverted the logical 0 and 1 voltage levels.
Contracters now charge *hundreds* of dollars for
little boxes to invert the levels so military
hardware can be interfaced with civilian technology.
(down not across)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQCVAwUBMOleBujpikN3V52xAQFQEQP7Ban+ALpT6N3wqmwiKL4XNE6t9gsyNuD2
dwjeePjNLcqoDlKLyU5wFolAirzcCRC5jPgvmNYoFwtcdBbdEavJZ0xlr0rAkUfm
wVI8VgnwLL4Xwtz5zKgaB85hUxbFhlhjMzXcn51sDxJCFjgiCWiA5rF7D2MVBtH2
xeGjFJLyCRU=
=2O0H
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Jamie Downs
: (geeze, nothing worse than fake nostalgia... next thing you know we'll be
: back to "we didn't even have 0s. we had to use the letter O", and "well,
: we had to bang stars together to make our own silicon by nuclear fusion")
You had it easy... The stars hadn't even formed yet... We had to make our own
silicon by taking the proper number of electrons, neutrons and protons, and
slamming them together!
egon
Clare West
> Again...
> There is no insert mode in VI, just an insert command.
> There are VIs set up with macros such that when you hit a cursor key,
> they terminate the current command, move, and start a new insert command.
Yeh. At least some of the ones arund here do that. Drives me up the wall.
clare
--
cl...@cs.auckland.ac.nz OWotRFA
http://clare.cs.auckland.ac.nz/
Thinking of Maud you forget everything else. -- hack v1.0.3
Who was that Maud person anyway? -- nethack v3.1.0
SKeneagy
>_We_ had to create a whole flipping universe, with the right physical
>constants and tweakings of physics to actually get protons and neutrons
and
>so on to form so we _could_ make silicon...
Sheesh... that was easy...
_We_ had to create the physical constants and physics to tweak.
One AOLer to Another: "I am such a k-rad d00d... I scanned the 900 area
code!!!!"
Friends Don't let Friends use AOL
http://dont.make.a.mistake.typing.this.or.you.will.have.to.type.it.again.a
nd.your.fingers.will.fall.off
ZenTOS better not get in my way....
because I am in a REAL bad mood today
Martin H. Booda
Peter Bierman <lun...@cs.wisc.edu> wrote:
>
>Oh, you think you're tough? One of the entry level CS classes at
>UW-Madison requires students to multiply IEEE-Floating Point numbers in
>binary, by hand.
>
Martin "oh, and grow several more hands and feet" Booda
--
Usenet is essentially a HUGE group of people passing notes in class. --R. Kadel
Clare West
In alt.sysadmin.recovery pedw...@valhalla.cs.wright.edu writes:
(with an annoying Followup-To: poster line)
> With <DKEMs...@bonkers.taronga.com>,
> it seems Peter da Silva (pe...@bonkers.taronga.com) sez:
> + >From OSF/1's vi(1) page:
> +
> + The manual's wrong.
> Oh. Okay. Here DEC has been creating good code for years and years,
> and da Silva can single-handedly authoritatively decree that the tech
> writers are completely around the bend. Sorry, sir, I just lost what
> respect I (honestly) had for you.
Not that I'm one for calling people sir in any case, unless they have
knighthoods of one kind or another, but if you have lost all that
respect, why are you still calling him sir?
> Can we at least agree that vi has two different "feelies"? One feely
> where you press the little buttons and things appear on the screen, and
> another feely where you press the little buttons and the other thing
> just moves around and does stuff? Regardless of what "mode" one is in?
Well as waffly as that is I guess it can occasionally be useful to
think of vi like that. I always hated vi for its "modes" until someone
explained to me that it really doesn't have modes, just some commands
with rather long arguments. Now I use it quite often.
> (I would go back to network programming, but how can I now that
> the accuracy of the man pages is in doubt? I'll just have to go
> back to experimenting! Lord help me- I'll be just like one of
> the original computer scientists!)
I do *very* little programming under UNIX (or anything else), but at
least 50% of the programs or program fragments I have written in the
last year have been bitten by manual errors. These days I read the
header files at least as often as the manuals.
Jamie Downs
[Back in *my* time upmanship deleted]
: store, run 'em through, quick slam the lid on before they all flew
: apart, sprint for home, get out the electrons, and then, THEN, we
: could think about making some matter.
At least things matter now. Back in my time, NOTHING mattered.
egon
Pete Ehlke
>pe...@bonkers.taronga.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
>: (geeze, nothing worse than fake nostalgia... next thing you know we'll be
>: back to "we didn't even have 0s. we had to use the letter O", and "well,
>: we had to bang stars together to make our own silicon by nuclear fusion")
>You had it easy... The stars hadn't even formed yet... We had to make our own
>silicon by taking the proper number of electrons, neutrons and protons, and
>slamming them together!
You had *protons*?!? Hedonist. When I were a wee lad, we had to make
our own particles. Every time we wanted something new, it was gather
a bucket of neutrons, trudge off to the local Van De Graff electric
store, run 'em through, quick slam the lid on before they all flew
apart, sprint for home, get out the electrons, and then, THEN, we
could think about making some matter.
--
"It's just not fair that you have to be smart *and* work hard in order
to get an A in this class." - One of my wife's students.
Bruce Johnson
>
> eg...@atw.fullfeed.com (Jamie Downs) writes:
>
> >pe...@bonkers.taronga.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
>
> >: (geeze, nothing worse than fake nostalgia... next thing you know we'll be
> >: back to "we didn't even have 0s. we had to use the letter O", and "well,
> >: we had to bang stars together to make our own silicon by nuclear fusion")
>
> >You had it easy... The stars hadn't even formed yet... We had to make our own
> >silicon by taking the proper number of electrons, neutrons and protons, and
> >slamming them together!
>
> You had *protons*?!? Hedonist. When I were a wee lad, we had to make
> our own particles. Every time we wanted something new, it was gather
> a bucket of neutrons, trudge off to the local Van De Graff electric
> store, run 'em through, quick slam the lid on before they all flew
> apart, sprint for home, get out the electrons, and then, THEN, we
> could think about making some matter.
YOU HAD NEUTRONS!!!??? Luuuxury
Why when I was a tyke we had to scrape quarks from the
space-time continuum, taste 'em to make sure they were the right flavor,
then juggle 'em together until they stuck....
--
Bruce Johnson
Information Technology/College of Pharmacy
The University of Arizona
joh...@tonic.pharm.arizona.edu
As if this place HAD any opinions...
Ian Jackson
>accurate. Vi works all right for me, but I've been informed by
>one of my users that vi has only two modes. The first is insert
>mode, as described above. The second is `beep' mode, where any key
>you type produces a `beep'.
This user of yours is clearly using some newfangled improved vi.
The real vi has two modes[1]:
Beep mode (much as above), where any keypress processes a beep -
except the keypress to get into corrupt mode.
Corrupt mode, where any keypress produces a subtle, undesirable and
often completely invisible change to the file being edited - except,
of course, the key to get back into beep mode.
[1] I was going to put quotes around this to keep Peter da Silva
happy, but happiness would be out of place around here. Peter, please
|perl -pe 's/mode\w*/"$&"/g if m/^\w/' my posting.
--
Ian Jackson ijac...@chiark.chu.cam.ac.uk These opinions are my own.
Cambridge University Computer Laboratory, New Museums Site. + 44 1223 3 34676
Home: ijac...@gnu.ai.mit.edu Churchill College, CB3 0DS. + 44 1223 3 31579
PGP2 public key available. http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/users/iwj10/
Jerry Leslie
[ snip ]
: This user of yours is clearly using some newfangled improved vi.
: The real vi has two modes[1]:
: Beep mode (much as above), where any keypress processes a beep -
: except the keypress to get into corrupt mode.
: Corrupt mode, where any keypress produces a subtle, undesirable and
: often completely invisible change to the file being edited - except,
: of course, the key to get back into beep mode.
: [1] I was going to put quotes around this to keep Peter da Silva
: happy, but happiness would be out of place around here. Peter, please
: |perl -pe 's/mode\w*/"$&"/g if m/^\w/' my posting.
ROFL (mopping up Diet Cola from VAXStation's keyboard & monitor)
The following article explains why people use 'vi'.
--Jerry,
Gerald (Jerry) R. Leslie jle...@dmccorp.com gle...@isvsrv.enet.dec.com
Dynamic Matrix Control Corporation (my opinions are my own)
DISCLAIMER - These opoi^H^H "dang", ^H, [esc :q :qq !q "NYRGH!" :Q! "Whaddya
mean, Not an editor command?" :wq! ^C^C^C !STOP ^bye ^quit :quit! !halt ...
^w^q :!w :wq! ^D :qq!! ^STOP [HALT! HALT!!! "Why's it doing this?" :stopit!
:wwqq!! ^Z ^L ^ESC STOP :bye bye bye! M-X-DOCTOR "HELP! I can't get out of
this stupid editor!!!" And how does this make you feel?
==============================================================================
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.admin
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <dmi...@parsy.spb.su>
Subject: More & more people choose `vi'
X-Return-Path: gsp!parsy!dmitry
Organization: unknown
Distribution: su
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 1994 16:53:25 GMT
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9406011734.A17295-0100000@parsy>
Sender: news-s...@arcom.rcom.spb.su
Lines: 61
MORE AND MORE PEOPLE CHOOSE `VI'. CASE OF STUDY
This article is just a part of a fundamental opus devoted to investi-
gation of UNIX. Scientists of the future will read UNIX's manual pages
with the same feel of a light perplexity that comes to us when we turn
the pages of `Witch Hammer' (some people feel it right now). This work
should help them in their heavy task.
Let us consider a very obscure question - why people like `vi' and
why it looks like `vi'. Certainly, there must be lots of convincing rea-
sons in deleting a character by pressing three keys `ESC', `x', `i' in-
stead of single `del'. We should immediately reject opinions like `peo-
ple search for obstacles to overwhelm them' as unscientific ones. Con-
sidering this issue more thoroughly we can find at least four approaches
to it.
(o) Astronomical point of view. As we know most of programmers work
putting their legs on the system block. (If you have a `tower'
just move it from your table to the floor, you'll feel the
difference!). To achieve maximal comfort legs should be arranged
along the magnetic lines. Well, let us take a look on the key-
board laying over your mmmm... stomach. In this position a line
connecting keys `x' and `ESC' points right to the North star. At
the same time `x' - `i' axis indicates the equinoctial point.
(o) Magical approach. After active usage of described above `ESC',
`x', `i' key sequence everybody comes to the conclusion that
SOMETHING'S WRONG and enters another sequence - `ESC', `:', `q',
`!'. As we know `ESC' abbreviates the word `escutcheon'. If we
consider keys `x', `i', `:', `q' and `!' we can notice that they
organize a magic pentagram. It is clear that multiple drawing
the pentagram protects us from the cruel daemons hidding in the
CPU.
(o) Medical reasons. Clinical researches show that using `vi' keeps
tonus of your fingers at the level of a violonist, that prevents
a gout. However, you should be careful working at home. Be shure
that the door to the chield room is tightly closed unless you
want to hear from your son the sentences you usually address to
`vi'.
(o) Psycho-analysis. Sexual instinct...
******
(for specialists only)
In conclusion I would like to state that we are currently at the very
beginning of understanding deep laws ruling over the world. Some impor-
tant questions remain unexplored. For example, why are we using `ESC',
`d', `d', `i' to delete a line rather than handy `ESC', `f', `d', `h',
`s', `t', `h', `n', `v', `b', `i'?
Never mind, `vi' should overcome some day!
[__][__][__][__][__][__][__][__][__][__][__][__][__][__][__][__][__][__]
[][__][ Dmitry A.Kazakov ][__][__][__ What is mind? - No matter. ][__][]
[__][__ Parsytec Petersburg [__][_ What is matter? - Never mind. __][__]
[][__][ dmi...@parsy.spb.su _][__][__][__][ -- Bertrand Russell _][__][]
[__][__][__][__][__][__][__][__][__][__][__][__][__][__][__][__][__][__]
Debbie Schwartz
>: apart, sprint for home, get out the electrons, and then, THEN, we
>: could think about making some matter.
>
You had Time? Back in my epoch, everything happened all at once.
You think it's rough being a sysadmin *now*..........
--
Debbie Schwartz d...@halcyon.com (Seattle, WA)
"That's why I'm not married - I'm devoting my life to being a
psychiatric patient. It's like being a nun, but more expensive."
-- Shelley Long in "The Cracker Factory"
Michael Ellis
: <eg...@atw.fullfeed.com (Jamie Downs)> spake thusly:: You had Time? Back in my epoch, everything happened all at once.
: You think it's rough being a sysadmin *now*..........
Bah. Back in *my* non-determined-but-probably-nonzero moment of creation,
not only did we have to create the idea of time, but we had to bootstrap
the idea of creating creation. Which was a real pain, as the idea of
making a front panel with switches on it was a long way off, subjectively
speaking. Came somewhere after mollusks, as I recall.[1]
[1] Can we stop this now?
Mike
--
Michael K. Ellis
mke...@mordor.com
Marge Robbins
length
>
>Bah. Back in *my* non-determined-but-probably-nonzero moment of creation,
>not only did we have to create the idea of time, but we had to bootstrap
>the idea of creating creation. Which was a real pain, as the idea of
>making a front panel with switches on it was a long way off, subjectively
>speaking. Came somewhere after mollusks, as I recall.[1]
>
>[1] Can we stop this now?
>
Nope! I wanna hear how the really early programmers created nothing from
nothing.
Marge
--
Mrob...@netins.net or mrob...@litekepr.com
http://www.netins.net/showcase/fidonet/
John Vaughan
>>[1] Can we stop this now?
>>
> Nope! I wanna hear how the really early programmers created nothing from
>nothing.
Well, I'm not sure about that - but you can bet your bottom dollar that
Bill Gates tried to market it to God as The Next Big Thing (tm).
Michael Ellis
:
: Nope! I wanna hear how the really early programmers created nothing from
: nothing.
Well, for one thing, back then divide by zero was a legal operation...
Ned Brickley
>In article <DKnA2...@ritz.mordor.com>, mke...@ritz.mordor.com Babbles at
>length
>>
>>Bah. Back in *my* non-determined-but-probably-nonzero moment of creation,
>>not only did we have to create the idea of time, but we had to bootstrap
>>the idea of creating creation. Which was a real pain, as the idea of
>>making a front panel with switches on it was a long way off, subjectively
>>speaking. Came somewhere after mollusks, as I recall.[1]
>>
>>[1] Can we stop this now?
>>
>
> Nope! I wanna hear how the really early programmers created nothing from
>nothing.
Sorry, that only happens in congress.
Ned Brickley
Have you hugged you Sysadmin today?
Or kissed your Support Tech?
Empire.Net, Inc. http://www.empire.net/~traveler
Hiroki
: In article <DKnA2...@ritz.mordor.com>, mke...@ritz.mordor.com Babbles at
: length
: >
: >Bah. Back in *my* non-determined-but-probably-nonzero moment of creation,
: >not only did we have to create the idea of time, but we had to bootstrap
: >the idea of creating creation. Which was a real pain, as the idea of
: >making a front panel with switches on it was a long way off, subjectively
: >speaking. Came somewhere after mollusks, as I recall.[1]
: >
: >[1] Can we stop this now?
: >
: Nope! I wanna hear how the really early programmers created nothing from
: nothing.
What's there to write about?
They just emulated lawyers.
hiroki
Mary Conner
>One AOLer to Another: "I am such a k-rad d00d... I scanned the 900 area
>code!!!!"
Coke. Nose. Keyboard. You know the drill.
--
Mary Conner tr...@serv.net
Tim D. Bandy
!:In article <DKnA2...@ritz.mordor.com>, mke...@ritz.mordor.com Babbles at
!:length
!:>
!:>Bah. Back in *my* non-determined-but-probably-nonzero moment of creation,
!:>not only did we have to create the idea of time, but we had to bootstrap
!:>the idea of creating creation. Which was a real pain, as the idea of
!:>making a front panel with switches on it was a long way off, subjectively
!:>speaking. Came somewhere after mollusks, as I recall.[1]
!:>
!:>[1] Can we stop this now?
!:>
!: Nope! I wanna hear how the really early programmers created nothing from
!:nothing.
!: Marge
Feh! That's easy. It's much harder, though, to create nothing from
something, which I have done. Actually, I did it, and I'll do it again.
Watch.
Yup. Wanna see it again?
--
Tim Bandy University of Minnesota (systems staff)
ba...@cs.umn.edu ba...@itlabs.umn.edu
http://www.cs.umn.edu/~bandy/index.html
"And so, may evil beware and may good dress warmly and eat
lots of fresh vegetables" --The Tick
/225686/lgoldste/Lee Ann Goldstein
><eg...@atw.fullfeed.com (Jamie Downs)> spake thusly:
>>p...@io.com (Pete Ehlke) writes:
>>
>>[Back in *my* time upmanship deleted]
>>
>>: apart, sprint for home, get out the electrons, and then, THEN, we
>>: could think about making some matter.
>>
>>At least things matter now. Back in my time, NOTHING mattered.
>
>You think it's rough being a sysadmin *now*..........
Yeah, we had to use Kabbalistic incantations to get linear time going...
OK folks, here's some real nostalgia for you. The following bit of
nonsense was handed to me in January 1979, in NYC. I still have a
very clear memory of reading it over the phone to the headhunter I
was working with at the time (I was just starting to look for a job
in LA [and I still have the one I found]), with him laughing so hard
that I expected at any moment to hear him fall out of his chair.
(no, I don't expect any of you to find this quite as funny, in quite
the same way as I did 17 years ago [hmm, maybe if we swapped IBM for
Micro$loth...])
Object: New Operating System Announcement
(State of the Art Technology)
Because so many users have asked for an operating system of
even greater capability than VM, IBM has announced the Virtual
Universe Operating System - OS/VU.
Running under OS/VU, the individual user appears to have not
merely his own machine, but an entire universe, in which he can
set up and take down his own programs, data sets, computers,
networks, personnel, and planetary systems. He need only spe-
cify the universe he desires, and the OS/VU system generation
program (SYS1.GOD) does the rest.
Naturally, the user must have attained a certain degree of
sophistication in the data processing field if an efficient
utilization of OS/VU is to be achieved. Frequent calls to
non-resident galaxies, for instance, can lead to unexpected
delays in the execution of a job. Although IBM, through its
wholly owned subsidiary, the United States, is working on a
program to upgrade the speed of light and thus reduce the over-
head of extraterrestrial and metadimensional paging, users must
be careful for the present to stay within the laws of physics.
IBM must charge an additional fee for violations.
OS/VU will run on any IBM 3803033n, n=2,3,5..., equipped with
Warp. Rental is twenty billion dollars per CPU/nanosecond.
Users should be aware that IBM plans to migrate all existing
systems and hardware to OS/VU as soon as our engineers effect
an output that is (conceptually) error-free. This will give us
a base to develop an even more powerful operating system, target
date 2001, designated "Virtual Reality". OS/VR is planned to
enable the user to migrate totally unreal universes, with the
exception of one program status word, one 220V standard wall
plug, and his checkbook.
If you have any questions or comments regarding this new
announcement, please contact your IBM sales representative.
---
Lee Ann Goldstein lgol...@ladc.lockheed.com
Network Administrator, F-117A Avionics Division
Lockheed Martin Skunk Works
I'm what passes for a Unix guru in my office. This is a frightening concept.
Peter da Silva
Ian Jackson <ijac...@chiark.chu.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>[1] I was going to put quotes around this to keep Peter da Silva
>happy, but happiness would be out of place around here. Peter, please
>|perl -pe 's/mode\w*/"$&"/g if m/^\w/' my posting.
Perl is for wusses who are afraid to write five line cryptic shell
pipelines in production code.
Peter da Silva
Marge Robbins <mrob...@netins.net> wrote:
> Nope! I wanna hear how the really early programmers created nothing from
I'm waiting for the bloke who invented sex to own up to it. Him and the
drongo responsible for toenails.
Hiroki
: In article <DKJ3s...@bonkers.taronga.com>,
: Peter da Silva <pe...@bonkers.taronga.com> wrote:
: >(geeze, nothing worse than fake nostalgia... next thing you know we'll be
: >back to "we didn't even have 0s. we had to use the letter O", and "well,
: >we had to bang stars together to make our own silicon by nuclear fusion")
: The Big Bang? I debugged that.
: 5150
You did all that and you couldn't bother to take the time
to put together a stinkin' man page?
jeez, you're worthless.
;-)
hiroki
A. Rich
john> Well, I'm not sure about that - but you can bet your bottom
john> dollar that Bill Gates tried to market it to God as The Next Big
john> Thing (tm).
The Next Big Bang(tm) that is......
and now programmers just make nothing out of something. not much on
the evolutionary ladder if you ask me ;}
Dylan Northrup
=: sken...@aol.com (SKeneagy) wrote:
=: >One AOLer to Another: "I am such a k-rad d00d... I scanned the 900 area
=: >code!!!!"
=: Coke. Nose. Keyboard. You know the drill.
You know, the AOLer joke wasn't that funny (IMNSHO) but the reply was
fucking hilarious. Damned good thing I can't afford soft drinks or this
would be a "Me too" posting ;-)
--
Dylan Northrup <*> nort...@pobox.com <*> http://pobox.com/~northrup <*>
Ask me about e-mail P.O. Boxes <*> "I don't want the world, just your half"
---------------
Random B5 Quote
---------------
"Stephen? Stephen, there's a Martian war machine parked outside. They'd
like to have a word with you about the common cold."
-- Vance Hendricks (to Dr. Franklin), "Infection"
C. J. Edsall
> Nope! I wanna hear how the really early programmers created nothing from
> nothing.
>
> Marge
% cat < /dev/null > /dev/null
OBasr
BHWFH (Bastard Homepage Writer from hell). A while ago I mentioned a URL
with a list of songs I play on the radio. Well I admin their web site
and I am considering adding a usage statistics packge (anyone suggest a
good one?), so I was looking through the logs. It's amazing how many
people don't come through the homepage but go straight to the
list. Looking at the error log where people interrupt the transfere and
examining the referrer URL it is clear that the group Porno for Pyros
peaked thier interest. No prizes for guessing what the keyword they
searched on was.
Anyway I have written a paragraph at the top explaining that there is no
pornography and they will only get Porno For Pyros. That should increase
the relevancy scores ;>
Chris Edsall http://www.phys.canterbury.ac.nz/~physcje/
hang 00001010 - net.surf!
"You are superconnected now \ all the freaks gather round"
Michael C. Grant
You had *protons*?!? Hedonist.
Oh, quit being so negative.
ha!
--
Michael C. Grant Information Systems Laboratory, Stanford University
mcg...@isl.stanford.edu <A HREF="http://www-isl.stanford.edu/~mcgrant">
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"When you get right down to it, your "Long hair, short hair---what's
average pervert is really quite the difference once the head's
thoughtful." (David Letterman) blowed off?" (Nat'l Lampoon)
root
On 5 Jan 1996, Tim D. Bandy wrote:
> It's much harder, though, to create nothing from something
cat something > /dev/null
m...@mole-end.matawan.nj.us
> Oh, you think you're tough? One of the entry level CS classes at
> UW-Madison requires students to multiply IEEE-Floating Point numbers in
> binary, by hand.
>
``But Professor, it _HURTS_ when I do that!''
``It does? Now you see why we invented computers--so you DON'T DO THAT!''
--
(This man's opinions are his own.)
From mole-end Mark Terribile
m...@mole-end.matawan.nj.us, Somewhere in Matawan, NJ
(Training and consulting in C, C++, UNIX, etc.)
Peter Radcliffe
> pedw...@valhalla.cs.wright.edu (Phil Edwards) wrote:
> the minds of otherwise highly-competent technical authors in a matter
> of months, sort of like the effect of seawater on automobile bodies.
>
> I'm still not sure quite what this effect is, but I've spent an awfully
> long time investigating it (from the inside of SCO's technical publications
> department, if you must know), and have come to a simple conclusion:
> understanding UNIX is like learning a foreign language. Unfortunately
> the deep grammar required by UNIX is subtly different from and incompatible
> with English, the primary language of most tech authors. As tech authors
> need to be able to translate between the two languages, the further into
> UNIX-land they get the less capable of communicating their experiences
> they become.
Sounds like 'Snow Crash' (an amusing book I just finished) ...
Is UNIX based on Somarian ? ;)
> Look at me. Three and a half years of writing man pages has turned me
> into an obligate Perl hacker who can barely string two sentences together
> without splitting infinitives, verbing nouns, passing variable length
> parameter lists, and drooling. It's sad, I tell you. (And if you'd ever
> seen the state of those BSD man pages before and after they passed through
> my hands you'd maybe understand ...)
There have been times after coding for too long (particularly after having
to work out all the incantations to make my socket code work exactly how
I wanted it to) I have trouble understanding English, let alone speaking it.
Someone actually said something to me as pseudo-C and I parsed it as a
normal question and answered it in the same way without thinking about it.
When this was pointed out to me, I went to bed :)
I'm glad I've never had to write man pages.
*ponder*
So, if understanding UNIX alters the language understanding part of your
brain by giving you a different deep-grammer to deal with, what does
Windows give you ?
By observation I'm going with 'full frontal labotomy' ;)
\pir
--
pir p...@surfers.itf.org.uk (preferred) p...@moek.demon.co.uk
Peter da Silva
Jeff Uphoff <jup...@tarsier.cv.nrao.edu> wrote:
>"PdS" == Peter da Silva <pe...@bonkers.taronga.com> writes:
>PdS> In article <+ri*0G...@chiark.chu.cam.ac.uk>,
>PdS> Ian Jackson <ijac...@chiark.chu.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>>> [1] I was going to put quotes around this to keep Peter da Silva
>>> happy, but happiness would be out of place around here. Peter, please
>>> |perl -pe 's/mode\w*/"$&"/g if m/^\w/' my posting.
>PdS> Perl is for wusses who are afraid to write five line cryptic shell
>PdS> pipelines in production code.
>Or for wusses who want their command to complete before the vendor ships
>the next OS rev.
Your problem is your pipelines aren't cryptic enough. You *know* adding more
metacharacters makes them run faster.
Jeff Uphoff
PdS> In article <+ri*0G...@chiark.chu.cam.ac.uk>,
PdS> Ian Jackson <ijac...@chiark.chu.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>> [1] I was going to put quotes around this to keep Peter da Silva
>> happy, but happiness would be out of place around here. Peter, please
>> |perl -pe 's/mode\w*/"$&"/g if m/^\w/' my posting.
PdS> Perl is for wusses who are afraid to write five line cryptic shell
PdS> pipelines in production code.
Or for wusses who want their command to complete before the vendor ships
the next OS rev.
--Up.
--
Jeff Uphoff - systems/network admin. | jup...@nrao.edu
National Radio Astronomy Observatory | jup...@bofh.org.uk
Charlottesville, VA, USA | jeff....@linux.org
PGP key available at: http://www.cv.nrao.edu/~juphoff/
Jeff Uphoff
IJ> This user of yours is clearly using some newfangled improved vi.
IJ> The real vi has two modes[1]:
IJ> Beep mode (much as above), where any keypress processes a beep -
IJ> except the keypress to get into corrupt mode.
IJ> Corrupt mode, where any keypress produces a subtle, undesirable and
IJ> often completely invisible change to the file being edited - except,
IJ> of course, the key to get back into beep mode.
This was the first "spit beverage all about the office" post that I've
seen in a *long* time.
--Up, with laughter tears still coming out of his eyes...
Jeff Uphoff
S> Benjamin Franz
S> Who once emulated a complete microcoded 16 bit multiply operation on paper.
How do you perform a multiply operation on paper?
Oh, you must have first torn it into little bits.
<duck, run>
--Up.
Tim D. Bandy
!:In article <19960109....@moek.demon.co.uk>,
!:Peter Radcliffe <p...@moek.demon.co.uk> wrote:
!:>So, if understanding UNIX alters the language understanding part of your
!:>brain by giving you a different deep-grammer to deal with, what does
!:>Windows give you ?
!:Ba be ne na ne ne ne na bo lo bo num en la ne ne la ne bo bo.
GPF?
Steve Simmons
>It's much harder, though, to create nothing from something . . .
No problem. Just put some money into a new ISP.
Jeff Uphoff
JDF> [comp.unix.admin happily munged from Newsgroups: header]
JDF> In comp.unix.admin and alt.sysadmin.recovery,
JDF> C. J. Edsall <c.ed...@phys.canterbury.ac.nz> wrote...
>> % cat < /dev/null > /dev/null
JDF> That sure doesn't take very long to run. *grin*
But this takes *forever*:
$ perl -n /dev/zero
(Though I must admit that I have not tried to redirect it to
/dev/null...)