> From: Roland Mainz <roland.mainz at nrubsig.org> ... > Joseph Kowalski wrote: > > > > > gmacs is considered an intuitive beginner's editing mode. It is the > > > default editing mode in bash and more or less matches the common input > > > mode of various GUI toolkits and desktops, including Gnome/GTK+, > > > KDE/Qt, CDE/Motif, Mozilla/XULRunner/Gecko, JAVA, and Xaw/Xaw3D. > > > > None the less, this seems like a strange choice for Solaris as there isn't > > anything called "gmacs" on the system. > > Solaris ships no "emacs" either... :-) > > There are three choices: "vi", "emacs" and "gmacs". IMO "vi" is not an > option (unless you want to punish beginners to learn "vi" before they > can use something in the shell... =:-) ), leaving only "emacs" and > "gmacs" as options (unless you want to drive more users into "bash"'s > direction...).
You failed to list one choice: "none". As per my next mail, I think this is the best choice. I don't like pushing stylistic choices as defaults. Was this possibility considered in the community discussions? > > I think I would be more inclinded to be accepting of gmacs if it was the > > common default mode for ksh on other systems. Is it? > > Linux distributions who ship ksh93 (such as SuSE) provide a > /etc/ksh.kshrc files which sets it. The only difference is that they > simply set the mode, overriding anything else and they don't care if > there was anything else set yet. This means "sets it to gmacs", right? Well, if I can't have TICO mode, I guess SuSE shipping gmacs mode is sufficent justification to me. I wasn't so much arguing with gmacs as looking for a better justification. Looking toward my next mail, I think I really favor shipping it empty. BTW: I use "vi" mode. Be careful what you say... 8^) > Uhm... there is no "fixed" format - /etc/ksh.kshrc is a shell script > (fragment) which gets sourced before ~/.kshrc ... Which is a very well defined, Committed format. > > be more appropriate, with the default default of gmacs (or > > whatever) being Uncommitted? I think reality is that once you ship such > > a file, we are not likely to be able to change its existance or format - > > too many administrators will latch on to it. > > ... what is your concern here ? IMO you really don't want to remove > /etc/ksh.kshrc later (unless you want to punish admins) and the format > doesn't change either - it's a ksh shell script fragment. You are reading me backward (I think). My concern is that you will never change the format or the name of this file. Hence they should be Committed. The contents of the primortial file we are proposing to ship may change uncompatably in a Minor release, hence Uncommitted. - jek3
