Steve, I think the Emacs is an academic favourite, not a commercial one. We had to pay small fortunes for decent word processors so when the free Emacs arrived, the academic world loved it. We just added it to the project costs... It might be a good tool if you "grow" up with it, i.e - start using it at the University and continue to do so. However, Emacs nor XEmacs wasn't useful in the commercial world as there was a training problem - the initial learning curve was to steep. Again, you don't want multiple word processors at a company.
I rather use vi or ed - probably because I'm an old git... I don't mind using line oriented editors like edlin, very efficient and low on memory. Anyway, leaving this offtopic trail now and may you enjoy your Emacs... Cheers Dan On Monday 21 November 2005 09:47, Stephen Meier wrote: > Dan, > > Is this per cpu or per user? > > For me. > > 1 User ;) despite wishing i had multiple personalities that could run > concurrently. > > 3 Suse boxes of which emacs is mandatory. > > Steve M. > > Dan Andersson wrote: > >Stuart, > > > >Slightly Off Topic but WTH... > > > >I'm sure 99.99% or even a larger proportion of the current and future SuSE > >users never uses Emacs and just would not miss it if removed from the > > dist! > > > >I just hated the Emacs from the very day it came out... as I was running > > both Vax/VMS and Unix at the same time during the early eighties. > > > >Yaya - scripting you say... better done in ed and perl anyway nowadays. > > > >Gnome versus KDE. > > > >KDE seems to please most of the people I work with here in Europe. For > > some odd reason, most of the US staff tend to prefer Gnome. However, SuSE > > are supposedly changing direction again, and moving towards Gnome as > > preferred desktop. Personally, I can't understand why SuSE ditched their > > Ximian Desktop as it was a KDE'ified Gnome... Looked good and was nice to > > work with. > > > >Anyway... I'm going to take a dive into the snapshot as the earlier > > created some trouble for me while attempting to compile. > > > >Also, I can't agree with anyone that complains on a compiler that are "too > >strict"... Try write the programs according to the language syntax spec > >instead and we would all have lesser compilation and porting problems. > >It's nice to see the latest gcc trying to clean up it's own act. > >( Yes, I'm originating from an ADA world... ) > > > > > >Cheers > > > > > >Dan > > > >On Monday 21 November 2005 00:57, Stuart Brorson wrote: > >>Peter, and anybody else interested: > >> > >>I put a snapshot of the latest gEDA Suite install CD onto my website: > >> > >>http://www.brorson.com/gEDA/ > >> > >>The one you want to try is dated 20051120. It is an alpha-test > >>release. It seems to work on SuSE 10.0, at least in the few > >>configurations I have tested. Note that SuSE 10.0 doesn't install > >>gcc, or any of the gtk-devel stuff by default. (It doesn't install > >>emacs by default either, unless you install the LaTeX package. What's > >>up with that?!?!?!?) Therefore, you need to make sure these are > >>installed before running the installer. You also need to install the > >>Gnome version of the desktop environment -- and not the KDE version -- > >>of course. > >> > >>Anyway, this snapshot will likely install cleanly for you on SuSE > >>10.0. Please give it a trial, and let me know about your success or > >>failure. I hope it will help you, and by testing it you will help me! > >>Thanks! > >> > >>Stuart
