| 1 |
On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 05:08:16PM +0100, Stroller wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> On 1 Oct 2009, at 16:40, Stroller wrote: |
| 4 |
> > ... |
| 5 |
> > So it seems to me that you're right. It appears like maybe when |
| 6 |
> > `sudo` detects that it's running `visudo` it does seem to ignore |
| 7 |
> > $EDITOR. I, too, disagree with this behaviour. IMO the ebuild ("-- |
| 8 |
> > with-editor=/bin/nano") take the editor from "/etc/rc.conf", but I'm |
| 9 |
> > extremely curious why upstream makes this behaviour, anyway. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> Actually READING the bug actually showed a number of reasoned |
| 12 |
> responses to the OP's complaint. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> I don't think you'll have much luck debating this: since upstream |
| 15 |
> hardcodes it, it comes down largely to the nano-as-default-editor |
| 16 |
> argument, which was first made in the Paleolithic era and which has |
| 17 |
> been hotly debated without change since. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> I now appear unable to access that bug: |
| 20 |
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=286017 |
| 21 |
> Thanks for that. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> Stroller. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
I'm unable to read the bug as well, which I find bothersome (how many |
| 28 |
bugs have they hidden from users?). |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
However, I'm also wondering why the ebuild doesn't make use of the |
| 31 |
EDITOR variable as was mentioned. This defaults to nano so it should |
| 32 |
work fine in a default install, and would avoid issues like this which |
| 33 |
seems to be an arguement that the dev(s) are trying to force specific |
| 34 |
programs on the users. |
Archives