Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 11:02:04 -0600 From: "Mike Meyer" <mwm-dated-1011286924.ab58f2@mired.org> To: "Joe & Fhe Barbish" <barbish@a1poweruser.com> Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: RE: Editors in base FBSD Message-ID: <15424.27660.360770.137851@guru.mired.org> In-Reply-To: <127960511@toto.iv>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[context lost to top posting.] Joe & Fhe Barbish <barbish@a1poweruser.com> types: > Greg: > As the original poster of this subject I may have > worded my statements based on my experiences of editors > I have used on IBM mainframes. Very primitive to me > equates to very hard to use (IE very un_user friendly) > and I have not read any responses that disagree with that. Having worked with IBM mainframes, "primitive" is the first word that comes to mind about almost any bit of software one finds on them. "Hard to use" is second. > To me, a command line editor is one that is launched from the > FBSD command line as to from within X11. I am building > web servers, firewall servers, email servers and none of > them will ever have x11 installed or x11 desktops. > I need a strong editor launched from the command line that > does not need x11 to function. At work I can always plug the > development FBSD box into the production hub to gain access to > it from my personal production mswindows box and use tn3270 to > telnet in or FTP/95 to move selected files over for edit update > and return it. Others have mentioned emacs. It's in the ports tree. Xemacs works in both environments. Of course, not installing X on servers is like tieing one hand behind your back. Yes, you don't bother installing a desktop, but it's really nice to be able to use X tools on them from an X workstation. That is sort of moot if you don't have an X workstation. > But I really need a native FBSD edit solution for disaster recovery > where the mswindows LAN is down or not present at that site. The real solution to that is to learn enough of ed to get the system to the point where your favorite tools work. Forget visual editors like vi and ee - having support for full screen editing is just more things that might be broken in that disaster so that your "solution" doesn't work. > So let me re-ask my question to you in better terms. > > Do you know of any editors that are launched from the command > line, that do not need x11 to run, that displays a full screen > and uses mouse point & click to position the curser and allows > cut or copy and past functions, along with PK keys for top of > file, bottom of file, exit with save, exit without save, and > standard keyboard arrow button & insert, delete, page up, > page down buttons? Mouse support won't exist in your disaster situation, no matter what editor you use. Emacs meets all the other criteria, though you'll have to configure it for the function keys to work. > What I am looking for is a full featured editor like ISPF edit > on IBM MVS systems or it's clone PC ISPF EDIT for mswindows? Full-featured? You mean you understand SGML DTD's so you can use them for editing HTML and take advantage of the DTD, and they can preview HTML pages displaying the inline image? Those are a couple of the features that need to be in any editor I'd call "full-featured". However, you might want to see if you can get uniSPF <URL: http://www.wrkgrp.com/uniSPF/index.html > to work under Linux emulation. As noted above, that still won't help for disaster recovery. Adding in needing the Linux base system is yet more things that the disaster might have broken. <mike -- Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15424.27660.360770.137851>