Why not the best of both worlds, vim (Vi IMproved.) A fully vi
compatible editor with a GUI mode and features too numerous to mention
but including full session logging to allow edit recovery after a
system crash or session disconnect and/or unlimited undo/redo
capability, on-line documentation, split screen operation, colour
syntax highlighting support for most popular languages (Makefiles,
Perl, HTML, TeX, etc...), digraph support for accented character
input, right to left support for Hebrew and Arabic input, command
recall. Vim is the default editor on RedHat Linux and is available
for Wintel and other platforms as well.
ftp://ftp.vim.org/pub/vim
--
O- J. Anthony Fitzgerald, j...@UNB.ca, http://www.unb.ca/csd/staff/jaf -O
>I have an old RS/6000 server in my room, I am playing around with it and I am
>not sure what good text editors are available.
There is only One True Editor: vi
Regards,
subbu
Tony Fitzgerald wrote:
--
J.N. Subrahmanyam
Software Engineer
IBM India Ltd.
PARVAAZ Building
Shanker Shet Road
PUNE - 411 001
One simple reason: it doesn't come with the base system and vi does.
If you're going to do admin, get real comfortable with vi. If
you're going to code, try emacs.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
I though the true editor was ed and vi was a full screen front end
developed for wimps. ;-)
Trog 'edlin' Woolley
Trog Woolley
(A Croweater languishing in Pommie Land)
Isis Astarte Diana Hecate Demeter Kali Inanna
Tony Fitzgerald wrote:
> In article <i5Q84.1523$G3.190...@news.frii.net>,
> Nicholas Dronen <ndr...@io.frii.com> wrote:
> >If you want to learn Unix at all -- and don't want to be just another
> >GUI-enslaved user -- you should at the least learn how to use vi. For
> >system administration, a GUI editor is simply less efficient.
>
For a sysadmin "vi" is mandatory (its the only one really builtin).
If you've got CDE there's a builtin editor too.
For serious work, especially coding (C, HTML, LaTex, ...), you might give
the freeware "nedit" a try.
I discourage people to use emacs (or its variant xemacs).
It swallows a lot of RAM (w/o benefit), and, even worse,
it breaks at every new AIX release. This isn't AIX's fault,
since 95%+ of all software built for lower AIX levels runs on higher
release *w/o recompile*. Not so emacs, since they apparently mess around
with the stack frame or such, emacs fails on a regular basis when it comes
to change AIX versions.
Text editors are like religions: everyone has their favorite,
which they know is the best one.
Having said that, I'm using "ED" from inside 'tin' on
an AIX 3.2.5 system to write this followup:
From ftp.wku.edu:
ED
Version: V1.5.7, 17-AUG-1994
Description: An EDT-lookalike editor for VMS, UNIX, and DOS
Author: Charles Sandmann <sand...@clio.rice.edu>
Architecture: VAX,AXP
# of parts: 6
Language: C
The ED editor includes an FTP client to edit files on a remote
system, as well as its own newsreader.
--Jerry Leslie (my opinions are strictly my own)
I use PICO editor. which is available at the pine site.
use www.google.com to search
>
>I use PICO editor. which is available at the pine site.
>use www.google.com to search
>
Comes as part of pine, and is available. htp://www-frec.bull.com has
it in their archive.
Villy
In article <19991224142825...@ng-cp1.aol.com>,
alan...@aol.com (Alanelson) wrote:
> I have an old RS/6000 server in my room, I am playing around with it
and I am
> not sure what good text editors are available. Any suggestions would
severly
> cut down on looking through the /usr file
> thanks so much
> Alan
>