LFS editor of choice should be vi

Seth Payne SPayne at Legato.com
Thu Nov 30 15:06:48 PST 2000


Ok, this is just purely silly.  If you want to use pico use pico!  For
heaven sakes its a freakin text editor!!!  Besides, Gerard has already
spoken and its his damn project.  If its that important to you start your
own LFS project which is text-editor independent.   

As far as your comment that advocacy is evil:

I am an advocate for civil rights...  is that evil?

I am an advocate for free software... is that evil?

I would hope that one would be more careful when assigning the term "evil"
to anything.  Wars, dirty politicians and hate are evil.  Disagreements over
a damn text editor to not rise to the level of evil.



Seth

-----Original Message-----
From: Matthias Benkmann [mailto:mbenkmann at gmx.de]
Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2000 3:57 PM
To: lfs-discuss at linuxfromscratch.org
Subject: Re: LFS editor of choice should be vi


> Yo,
> 
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2000 at 06:23:24PM +0100, Matthias Benkmann wrote:
> > I consider fairness to be very important. And giving vim special
treatment 
> > is not fair, it's advocacy. And advocacy is evil (and unprofessional).
> 
> Agreed, but like all things in life, you have to find the balance.
> 
> Picking the lesser of the evils (if you call it such) is not always a
> bad thing, nor unprofessional.
> 
> So what do you want included in the book? pico? nano? jed? emacs? joe?
> 
> It's all of them, or one... what is more professional having ~5 options
> or one that is supported well? (with, the given options of easily using
> a different one, simple as that)

If you're talking about fair, it's all of them or none. I'd suggest one of 
the following options:

a) Really include all editors with installation instructions (i.e. all 
editors for which someone volunteers to write the installation 
instructions). It could be put into an extra document (a hint) or chapter. 
The book would just have a pointer to it. No editor gets extra treatment 
in the book.

b) No installation instructions for any editor, just download locations 
for all of them. You can call it an exercise. After making it to chroot, 
an LFS reader should be able to install such a package on his own. If he 
can't he's probably not ready to continue.

c) Although I don't really like this because it's not fair, I could live 
with a compromise. That would be to include vim as a representative of, 
well, the vi-class of editors, and one additional editor that represents 
the large class of "normal" editors, i.e. an editor that normal people can 
use intuitively. That could be joe or pico or nano or ... . I think emacs 
is too fat but it would still be better than just vim. 

MSB

----
"#define BEGIN {"   and the miracle happens !
C gets readable!!


-- 
Unsubscribe: send email to lfs-discuss-request at linuxfromscratch.org
and put unsubscribe in the subject header of the message


-- 
Unsubscribe: send email to lfs-discuss-request at linuxfromscratch.org
and put unsubscribe in the subject header of the message




More information about the lfs-dev mailing list