| 1 |
Jon Portnoy wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> I could make a case that emacs is just as standard as vi - should we |
| 4 |
> include emacs? |
| 5 |
[...] |
| 6 |
> Why does any of that involve doing anything that nano cannot do but vim |
| 7 |
> can? |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
The long and short of it? |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
"On all POSIX.2 conforming systems vi is available. This allows users to |
| 12 |
move from one POSIX system to another without needing to learn a new |
| 13 |
editor." |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
The selection of Nano seems to be rather arbitrary. Why not Joe, Pico or |
| 16 |
any of the other simple, user-friendly editors? |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
-- |
| 19 |
Stewart Honsberger |
| 20 |
http://blackdeath.snerk.org/ |
| 21 |
"Capitalists, by nature, organize to protect themselves. |
| 22 |
-- Geeks, by nature, resist organizaion." |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives