| 1 |
On Fri, 2 Oct 2009 04:36:47 -0500, forgottenwizard wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> > > It isn't always on the users sytem. Providing a non-existent default |
| 4 |
> > > seems quite broken to me. |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > That's true of every editor, so you have to choose the one that is |
| 7 |
> > most likely to be there, the one that is installed for the stage |
| 8 |
> > tarballs and is there unless the user has taken specific steps to |
| 9 |
> > remove it. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> Or you could try to find a suitable default intelligently instead of |
| 12 |
> blindly compiling in a default that may or may not exist. Worse still is |
| 13 |
> blindly doing so without telling the user. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
The user is told. the handbook clearly explains how and why to set |
| 16 |
EDITOR. nano is only used when EDITOR cannot be found, in other words its |
| 17 |
a suitable default for a broken system. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> And if you, say, have two editors installed that satisfy virtual/editor? |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
How is this a problem? As long as a working editor is available to edit |
| 22 |
sudoers, nothing else is important, because once you are editing sudoers |
| 23 |
you can change the default in there. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
I fail to see why this is an issue in the first place, if you can set and |
| 26 |
environment variable or add a single line to a config file, you really |
| 27 |
should reconsider your choice of distro. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
At least I've learned one thing from this thread, I didn't even know that |
| 30 |
visduo had a built-in default choice of editor, mainly because it's |
| 31 |
always used the one I wanted it to. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
Neil Bothwick |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
Deja Foobar: A feeling of having made the same mistake before. |
Archives