Editor for Unix
news
suggestions?
-Mark
Floyd Davidson
vi or (x)emacs.
Everything else is shoot yourself in the foot time.
Floyd
--
Floyd L. Davidson fl...@ptialaska.net
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) fl...@barrow.com
North Slope images: <http://www.ptialaska.net/~floyd>
Rikard Bosnjakovic
>
> I'm looking for a good editor for Unix (not vi, xemacs, xedit, etc.). Any
> suggestions?
Vim, Pico, Joe.
--
// Rikard Bosnjakovic - http://a214.ryd.student.liu.se/ - ICQ: 1158217
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in his shoes. That
way, if he gets angry, he'll be a mile away - and barefoot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fernand0
On Tue, 1 Jun 1999 22:24:17 -0700, news <ma...@flashcardsonline.com> wrote:
>I'm looking for a good editor for Unix (not vi, xemacs, xedit, etc.). Any
>suggestions?
>
>-Mark
>
>
try nedit
Best regards,
Fernand0
Raj Dutt
>
> I'm looking for a good editor for Unix (not vi, xemacs, xedit, etc.). Any
> suggestions?
>
> -Mark
nedit.
--
____________________________________________________________
Raj Dutt Voxel Dot Net, Inc
Network Administrator in...@voxel.net
raj....@voxel.net http://hosting.voxel.net
Klaus Schilling
> news wrote:
> >
> > I'm looking for a good editor for Unix (not vi, xemacs, xedit, etc.). Any
> > suggestions?
>
> Vim, Pico, Joe.
GNU Emacs is the one and only worthy editor.
Klaus Schilling
Warren Porter
multiple windows open (able to look at variables while writing code that
uses them). For most uses, vi fills the bill nicely and I am getting used
to some powerful commands starting with a ":". Indeed if I have to use
someone else's terminal or am online a customer's computer, vi may be the
ONLY editor I have available. You would do well to become familiar with the
tools you have available in addition to getting a super editor.
news wrote in message <6f353.348$Dj2....@typhoon2.san.rr.com>...
>I'm looking for a good editor for Unix (not vi, xemacs, xedit, etc.). Any
>suggestions?
Warren Porter -- Remove numbers to reply.
Mike Castle
news <ma...@flashcardsonline.com> wrote:
>I'm looking for a good editor for Unix (not vi, xemacs, xedit, etc.). Any
>suggestions?
vi and emacs ARE the good editors.
What are you trying to accomplish that you feel that you need a different
tool?
As a rule of thumb, most people use vi and emacs. From my observations,
sys admin types tend to use vi and programmers tend to use emacs. The hard
core paranoid admins who are concerned about not having bootable media
around also tend to know ed fairly well.
Vi and ed are popular with admin types because, out of the box, most
versions of unix don't have emacs on them. And if it's a production
machine that won't have a lot of interactive use, loading emacs is often
considered an unnecessary adventure.
If you can name a feature that you feel you need in an editor, I'm sure you
can be directed better. Either someone would explain how you could
accomplish that in either vi or emacs, or that you really don't want to do
that and (hopefully) tell you why it is such a bad idea.
mrc
Greg Bacon
dal...@news.rt66.com (Mike Castle) writes:
: As a rule of thumb, most people use vi and emacs. From my observations,
: sys admin types tend to use vi and programmers tend to use emacs.
You say this as though the two were mutually exclusive.
Greg
--
I worry that the person who thought up "Muzac" may be thinking up something
else.
-- Lily Tomlin
Philip Brown
>I'm looking for a good editor for Unix (not vi, xemacs, xedit, etc.). Any
>suggestions?
jove
- gives you the basic movement, etc and featureset of emacs
- does NOT use elisp, have a newsreader, an email reader, or.....
- compiles to around 300K executable
- gives you interactive compile-n-debug, if you need that feature
--
[Trim the no-bots from my address to reply to me by email!]
[ Do NOT email-CC me on posts. Pick one or the other.]
--------------------------------------------------
The word of the day is sescaquintillion
fred smith
: I'm looking for a good editor for Unix (not vi, xemacs, xedit, etc.). Any
: suggestions?
: -Mark
[religious war]
You've just **excluded** all the good ones!
you'll have to look high and low, long and hard to find more powerful
editing tools than those. Easier to learn, oh yes, not hard to find,
but better? Doggone few if any are better.
[\religious war]
--
---- Fred Smith -- fre...@fcshome.stoneham.ma.us -----------------------------
For the wages of sin is death,
but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord
------------------------------ Romans 6:23 (niv) ------------------------------
Mike Castle
>In article <7j3odq$2ji$1...@shell.rt66.com>,
> dal...@news.rt66.com (Mike Castle) writes:
>: As a rule of thumb, most people use vi and emacs. From my observations,
>: sys admin types tend to use vi and programmers tend to use emacs.
>
>You say this as though the two were mutually exclusive.
They _tend_ to be.
"From my observations" people did tend to use one or the other, but not
both.
I did not want to imply that someone could use or or the other. That's why
I used phrases like "from my observations" and "tend to".
Personally, I even buck that trend. I consider myself a programmer, but
use vi exclusively. But I suspect that has a lot to do with the fact that
I spent 1.5 years as an admin for various machines that didn't have emacs
on them.
mrc
Greg Bacon
dal...@news.rt66.com (Mike Castle) writes:
: In article <7j40cc$lok$1...@info2.uah.edu>,
: Greg Bacon <gba...@cs.uah.edu> wrote:
: >You say this as though the two were mutually exclusive.
:
: "From my observations" people did tend to use one or the other, but not
: both.
By "the two", I meant programmers and sysadmins.
Greg
--
Playing chess is a software problem, but you still need a mighty powerful
computer to do it in a reasonable amount of time.
-- Gordon E. Moore
William Wueppelmann
the artist formerly known as news said:
>I'm looking for a good editor for Unix (not vi, xemacs, xedit, etc.). Any
>suggestions?
Do you mean that you want a good editor and you don't think vi or xemacs
are good editors, or that you want a good editor other than one of the
above? What would you consider to be a good editor?
Assuming you mean the former, I'd recommend vim. Vim is a substantially
enchanced version of vi. If you mean the latter, perhaps you should give
these editors a second try -- they take time to master, but it's time well
invested and the returns are high.
--
It is pitch black.
You are likely to be spammed by a grue.
Adam C. Emerson
> I'm looking for a good editor for Unix (not vi, xemacs, xedit, etc.).
> Any suggestions?
Vim?
(Okay, you could try jed, you could even try joe, if you like
none of those, just stick to pico, but that's hardly good)
--
Adam C. Emerson aeme...@atdot.org
http://www.calvin.edu/~aemers19/
Preach from it unto the Righteous, that they may renounce their
ways and repent. -- Honest Book of Truth
Adam C. Emerson
> In comp.unix.programmer, news <ma...@flashcardsonline.com> wrote :
> # I'm looking for a good editor for Unix (not vi, xemacs, xedit, etc.). Any
> # suggestions?
> #
> # -Mark
> ed. It's the standard Unix editor.
teco, just as powerful as emacs, without that uncomfortable bloated
feeling.
James Youngman
> I'm looking for a good editor for Unix (not vi, xemacs, xedit, etc.). Any
> suggestions?
I'm looking for a good car. Any suggestions?
--
ACTUALLY reachable as @free-lunch.demon.(whitehouse)co.uk:james+actually
James Youngman
> In comp.unix.programmer, news <ma...@flashcardsonline.com> wrote :
> # I'm looking for a good editor for Unix (not vi, xemacs, xedit, etc.). Any
> # suggestions?
> #
> # -Mark
>
> ed. It's the standard Unix editor.
Yes, but zcat is faster if you have a decent keyboard.
Bastard Feline from Hell
: In comp.unix.programmer, news <ma...@flashcardsonline.com> wrote :
: # I'm looking for a good editor for Unix (not vi, xemacs, xedit, etc.). Any
: # suggestions?
: #
: # -Mark
:
: ed. It's the standard Unix editor.
You mean ed, coupled with a line terminal? CRT's are for wusses!
Sorry, couldn't resist.
Kengo Hashimoto
--
"Because I don't have enough talent, I depend on reality."
-- Takamura Kotaro
G. Sumner Hayes
>
> Gabor (ga...@vmunix.com) wrote in article <slrn7la8cl...@vnode.vmunix.com>:
> : In comp.unix.programmer, news <ma...@flashcardsonline.com> wrote :
> : # I'm looking for a good editor for Unix (not vi, xemacs, xedit, etc.). Any
> : # suggestions?
> : #
> : # -Mark
> :
> : ed. It's the standard Unix editor.
>
> You mean ed, coupled with a line terminal? CRT's are for wusses!
A paper tty is preferred, no?
--Sumner
John E. Davis
wrote:
>I'm looking for a good editor for Unix (not vi, xemacs, xedit, etc.). Any
If you are looking for an editor that is easy to use, but has much of
the power of emacs, consider jed. The latest version has drop-down
menu support making it very easy to use and will work on ordinary
terminals. Here is an excerpt from the latest announcement:
Version B0.99-6 of the jed programmer's editor is now available from
ftp://space.mit.edu/pub/davis/jed/v0.99
and should appear within a day at the following mirrors:
ftp://ftp.uni-stuttgart.de:/pub/unix/misc/slang
ftp://ftp.prz.tu-berlin.de/pub/unix/editors/jed
ftp://ftp.ntua.gr/pub/lang/slang/
The major new feature in this release is the support for drop-down
menus. These menus work even when using jed via a remote terminal
making the editor easier to use than ever. See
http://space.mit.edu/%7Edavis/images/jed-0.99-6.gif for an image of
jed with the new menus.
--John
Robert D. Keys
> : # I'm looking for a good editor for Unix (not vi, xemacs, xedit, etc.). Any
> : # suggestions?
> :
> You mean ed, coupled with a line terminal? CRT's are for wusses!
> Sorry, couldn't resist.
Neither can I..... anyone got a spare TTY37 floating around with
fullpage sprocket-feed paper drive? I have been wanting to try
my V5 system on a dos pc emulator stuck in the closet and see what
the local NT folks say, hearing it clanking away at 110 baud.
That should draw some confused stares, news at 11.....(:+}}.....
RDK
Sean Burke
>
> news <ma...@flashcardsonline.com> wrote:
> >I'm looking for a good editor for Unix (not vi, xemacs, xedit, etc.). Any
> >
> >-Mark
>
> vi or (x)emacs.
>
> Everything else is shoot yourself in the foot time.
>
Funny you should mention this - I recently had the
experience where someone accidentally typed ":X" to
exit vi instead of ":x". They failed to grasp the
significance of the "Enter key:" prompt, and ended
up encrypting their file, without being able to guess
the key! :^)
-SEan
Bob van der Poel
You might want to have a look at my ved editor. Available on my web
site.
--
__
/ ) / Bob van der Poel
/--< ____/__ bvd...@uniserve.com
/___/_(_) /_) http://users.uniserve.com/~bvdpoel
eLind...@bigfoot.com
"news" <ma...@flashcardsonline.com> wrote:
> I'm looking for a good editor for Unix (not vi, xemacs, xedit, etc.).
Any
> suggestions?
>
> -Mark
>
>
As somebody who grew up in the CP/M / DOS world (as opposed to the Unix
World, Mac World, etc), traditional WordStar commands (e.g. ^Y to
delete a line) are burned into my brain forever (you must remember, I
started using WordStar at age 7, I'm 23 now).
Under DOS/Windows, nothing beats the SemWare editor. It's tiny,
blazingly fast, and has every feature one could ever want in an editor
(quite frankly, I don't want e-mail support in my editor!). With the
propper .UI file selected, it mimics WordStar/QEdit quite well. The
column block ability is unlike anything I can find in another editor.
Oh well, enough off topic blabber....
Under Unix/Linux the only editor I have found that really suits me is
Joe. Joe is tiny and fast, runs on practically anything, and runs
great over a text terminal or telnet connection. It faithfully mimics
most of the WordStar command sequences, but adds little that you won't
find in a circa 1983 copy of WordStar 3.3!
Granted, I don't do much Unix programming (I keep my code nightmares on
Wintel boxes!), but for doing basic sysadmin and writing shell scripts
for the bsd and Linux boxes I maintain, Joe fits the bill admirably.
I have friends who swear by Emacs, and I am sure it is a superb
product, but I just don't have the time to sit down and learn it.
Joe is included as an optional package for every Linux distribution
that I am familiar with, and is included on the CD's for FreeBSD and
OpenBSD (probably more, those are just the two I have experience with).
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
scot...@my-deja.com
evaluation version of CRiSP form the company's website at
http://www.vital.com It has both GUI and character versions and can
emulate vi, emacs, wordstar, and brief keyboard layouts.
In article <7jn13o$3df$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
John McKown
>DO U KNOW WERE I CAN DOWNLOAD THE UNIX TO WORK ON MY COMPUTER. THANX
>
>
> FUryFX-12
Ouch! Not so loud <grin>. Using all capital letters is "SHOUTING" and is
strongly discouraged. It's also more difficult to read. Also, most people
will simply ignore you.
If you really want do download a UNIX from the Internet, the first thing
to determine is, "Which one?". I use Linux myself. Linux is getting a lot
of press right now. But there are other free UNIX variants. NetBSD and
FreeBSD come to mind.
If you want Linux, try metalab at ftp://metalab.unc.edu . Login with the
name "anonymous" (no quotes!). do a "cd /pub/Linux/distributions". Now
figure out which distribution you want. I use RedHat. Debian is also
supposed to be very good. So is Suse. Slackware is well liked by many,
but has many detractors as well. Do a cd to the correct subdirectory.
Let's pretend it's redhat, so do a "cd redhat/current" to get to the
current release, which is 6.0. If you want the binaries, do a cd to
i386 (cd i386). You are now in
pub/Linux/distributions/redhad/current/i386
download EVERYTHING in that directory and in all subdirectories below
it (I.e. RedHat, doc, dosutils, images). Now install according to the
documentation that you just downloaded. Please don't ask me how to
install, I didn't do it this way.
Having said all that, I'd suggest doing it the easy way. Go to
http://www.cheapbytes.com and get a $2.00 CD. If you're really
plush, go for the super-deluxe set of CDs for less than $40.00.
If you decide on FreeBSD, then cheapbytes has a CD for $8.00 or you
can start your search at http://www.freebsd.org .
If you decide on NetBSD, then try http://www.netbsd.org .
I have never used FreeBSD or NetBSD. I've only used RedHat's distribution
of Linux. I find it to be easy to install and relatively easy to use.
The hardest part, for me, was getting connected to the 'Net. That was
a learning experience. Not difficult now that I know more, but for a
newbie from Windows, it was definately different.
John