| 1 |
On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 11:40:33AM +0200, Sebastian Be?ler wrote: |
| 2 |
> Am 02.10.2009 11:29, schrieb forgottenwizard: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> > <insert emacs user whining> |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > Thats an option, but seems to be a poor one. All that will do is let you |
| 7 |
> > use either vi(m) or nano for the default, which for emacs users will be |
| 8 |
> > no diffrent than the current problem. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> <joke> |
| 11 |
> If you use emacs then you are to far away to be helped ;-) |
| 12 |
> </joke> |
| 13 |
At least 8 megs of RAM isn't a problem anymore. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> Then maybe a "custom_editor"-flag that inserts |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> Defaults env_keep += "EDITOR VISUAL PAGER" |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> to /etc/sudoers |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> With that even emacs users would be satisfied. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> Greetings |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> Sebastian |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Didn't the maintainer/dev that was dealing with the bug say that he |
| 30 |
wouldn't do that because it was insecure? |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
That also doesn't fix the problem that sudo thinks that nano is a safe |
| 33 |
fallback. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
How about a custom_editor flag, as you suggested, then an EDITOR |
| 36 |
variable in make.conf? Thats the only way I could see being able to |
| 37 |
solve this problem without invariably screwing someone. This would |
| 38 |
provide a fairly sane default while giving the user the choice to use |
| 39 |
something else. |
Archives