On 6/6/05, Jari Aalto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > | Um, what did get invoked? joe, jmacs, or something else? > | > | Your alternatives are set for jmacs to start, and that's what should > | have happened, unless you've futzed with sensible-editor or something. > > It selected "joe". I would have expected to see "jmacs". No, > I havent touched shell script sensible-editor which would > have chosen nano for me, since EDITOR/VISUAL are not set. > > Would this have somethign to do with symlinks? > > lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 3 Jun 2 20:42 /usr/bin/jmacs -> joe > > If symlinks are resolved, what is left is "joe", but that is > a wrong command. "joe" is binary who detects its mode according > to first argv parameter it was invoked
It could very well have something to do with the use of symlinks. What happens if you call /usr/bin/editor directly from the command line? I suspect you would get the same result, since argv[0] would be "editor" - not "jmacs". Chris -- Chris Lawrence - http://blog.lordsutch.com/
