Linux-Misc Digest #245, Volume #20 Tue, 18 May 99 01:13:08 EDT
Contents:
Re: ATI vid card & Xwindows HELP please (Jim McCusker)
Re: The Vi Lovers Home Page (D. J. Birchall)
Re: kwintv - cannot change channel (root)
Re: The Vi Lovers Home Page (Timothy Murphy)
Re: Ken Thompson on Linux (Fred Kuipers)
Re: was getting a Lexmark 3200 a mistake? (Tim Williams)
Re: gnome RPMS suck??? + a few questions ("D. Vrabel")
Re: RedHat Linux 5.2 Deluxe Operating System (jik-)
Re: AutoInstall is for experts, not beginners!!! (Andrew Chung)
Re: The Vi Lovers Home Page (Scott Lanning)
Re: gnome RPMS suck??? + a few questions (Andrew Chung)
Re: FIXED(?): Staroffice/glibc problem (drub)
Re: CD Audio in RH6 ("Robert A. Ober")
Re: In defence of UNIX man pages (Charles E Taylor IV)
Re: The Vi Lovers Home Page (Bob Nelson)
Re: Registry in Linux ??? (Christopher Browne)
Re: New dumb question.... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: old elvis mouse behavior lost? Re: The Vi Lovers Home Page (brian moore)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jim McCusker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ATI vid card & Xwindows HELP please
Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 21:30:10 -0400
robert wrote:
>
> Ran the druid & probed for Video support. It found my ATI Video
> Expression & when I continued, set-up for video failed at 90%
> completion w/ this message. "X Free 86-Mach 64 failed unpacking of
> archive on file
> /usr/X11R6/man5/XF86Config.5X:1:
> no such file or directory.
> I installed to an old harddrive that is 234 megs, kept the package
> count low because of this, what I want from linux is there-for a
You may have filled up your HD regardless. If you have booted the system
after the install, type 'df' to see how much space is left. Unless the
archive is damaged, there shouldn't be any problem with unpacking it,
unless your hard drive is full.
Jim
--
Jim McCusker | Class of '99, BA Computer Science & Cognitive Science
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://cif.rochester.edu/~fprefect
~Those who do not understand Unix are condemned to reinvent it,
poorly.~
~~Henry
Spencer
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (D. J. Birchall)
Subject: Re: The Vi Lovers Home Page
Date: 18 May 1999 01:33:12 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >UC Berkeley has officially appologized for the creation of the
> > >not-much-better-than-Windows-Notepad editor vi.
> ok, maybe not officially.
Well then, what? Who has apologized, and in what way? (Other than
you? ;)
> > Why do people still keep using it?
* It doesn't mind being told that I'd like it to open _all_ the pages
on a 300-page web site and let me do stuff to them.
* It doesn't mind being told that I'd like to open files that happen
to be a meg. Or five megs. Or ten. Or twenty.
* It understands regular expressions and supports them in global search
and replace operations.
* It doesn't have a LISP interpreter built in.
* It doesn't try to be a web browser.
* It doesn't try to be a mail reader.
* It doesn't try to be a news reader.
* It doesn't do graphics.
* It doesn't try to be a page layout program.
* It doesn't care about the Melissa virus.
* It runs on just about everything, even clunky old PC's with nothing
but floppy drives.
-Dan
--
>From the Linux laptop of Dan Birchall, V.P. of Technology
Digital Facilities Management, Haddonfield, New Jersey
Internet/Extranets/E-Commerce - http://www.digitalfm.com/
------------------------------
From: root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: kwintv - cannot change channel
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 03:58:05 +0200
ok, I got it
--
Stefan Bress
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ICQ 198 11 595
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Timothy Murphy)
Subject: Re: The Vi Lovers Home Page
Date: 18 May 1999 02:54:27 +0100
Aqeel Mahesri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>UC Berkeley has officially appologized for the creation of the
>not-much-better-than-Windows-Notepad editor vi.
Is this a joke?
When did UC at Berkeley make this apology?
--
Timothy Murphy
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
tel: +353-1-2842366
s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
------------------------------
From: Fred Kuipers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Ken Thompson on Linux
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 02:20:16 GMT
Peter Rodriguez wrote:
> Rob Fisher wrote:
>
> > >
> >
> > > On the desktop, Linux is hampered mainly by its inability to run the
> > > standard desktop software, which is distributed mostly as Win32
> > > binaries. The WINE project, however, is gaining momentum and can now
> > > show some significant results.
> >
> > I was really disappointed with WINE. I think it's just too hard a
> > project when M$ can move the goalposts so easily. And although it's
> > interesting I also see it as essentially pointless. If you want to run
> > Windows apps and you've got the hardware in front of you, why not just
> > go into Windows? It's okay for if you want to dash off a quick Word
> > document while your new code compiles, but it's never going to help
> > Linux conquer the desktop is it? Most desktop users /only/ want to use
> > Word.
> >
> > Rob
>
> Maybe they only /use/ Word, but I doubt that they only
>
> /want/ to use it - most of them have no choice, due to
>
> dumb employers and their IT departments.
>
> Peter Rodriguez
> 136, Kolmar Road, Papatoetoe, Auckland
> NEW ZEALAND
I agree. Given the choice I'd gladly use WordPerfect... In fact I do! Both
on M$ and Linux. I only need M$ Office for compatibility with others...
Mind you there are Linux alternatives to using Word and Excel: Star Division
makes a suite called StarOffice (latest is 5) but unforunately doesn't work
on the latest releases of Linux (6.x). Bearing in mind, that this is
relatively a young suite, I think it is promising in that it provides the
ability to work with M$ files /without/ the M$ bloatware on the desktop.
FK
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Williams)
Subject: Re: was getting a Lexmark 3200 a mistake?
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 02:14:35 GMT
On Sun, 16 May 1999 02:38:48, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In article <dEfBft5hvBuv-pn2-gIyr8ILgBLHC@localhost>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Williams) wrote:
> > I recently bought a Lexmark 3200 after reading good comments in
> > comp.os.os2.misc. This was before I got Linux, but I was planning on
> > getting Linux in the near future. Well I have RH 5.2 now, and as you
> > might expect, this printer doesn't work with Linux. I didn't realize
> > it was a Windoze-type printer (since there was an OS/2 driver for it)
>
> It is truly bizarre that Lexmark went so far as to write a driver for
> OS/2 but then left Linux conspicuously absent from the support list.
>
> You're screwed. The printer needs proprietary drivers to work. Lexmark
> won't write a Linux driver, and no one else can write one because
> Lexmark won't release the specs. Catch-22.
>
Oh well. I still have an Epson LQ-850 that will work, but I boxed it
up when I got the Lexmark. I suppose I need to find room for two
printers and get an A/B switch. Maybe one day I'll sell the Lexmark
and get a printer that supports Linux. Don't really have much in the
budget though (or else I'd have gotten a PS printer.)
Are there good, inexpensive, color/BW inkjet printers that work under
Win9x / OS/2 / Linux?
______________________
Tim Williams
------------------------------
From: "D. Vrabel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: gnome RPMS suck??? + a few questions
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 00:09:02 +0100
On Mon, 17 May 1999, pika.pika wrote:
> I Installed redhat6 a week ago and fell in love with gnome.
> I got the latest and greatest from gnome.org only to find that
> they dont compile due to missing config files and sh files.
Which files are missing? Did you run configure before make?
> Had to install everything from the top of the gnome installation
> tree (glib). Do rpms clean up after itself or does it just put the
> binaries somewhere and forget about it... where are the missing files?
Don't know about this I use debs which do.
> so question 1:
>
> by compiling the sources with prefix=/usr which redhat seems to use, am
> i overwriting the RPMed files redhat put there?
Could do. I'd recommend putting all of GNOME into /usr/local or its own
tree /opt/gnome
> This would be good cuz I dont gotta worry about conflicts... but not
> sure wat happens in the lib directory...
>
> If not then do I have to uninstall all the offending RPMs first b4 I
> compile?
If you're compiling your own I would.
> question 2:
>
> wat does ldconfig do?
Updates the libraries path list or something like that.
> question 3:
>
> is there anyway to install RPMs with those missing files?
> question 4:
>
> wat are all those warnings during compiles?... like
> warning, attempted redefinition of something something
>
> dont the developers see those warnings themselves?
I treat warning as bugs until I know what they mean and whether I can
safely ignore them.
David
--
David Vrabel
Engineering Undergraduate at University of Cambridge, UK.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 19:51:55 -0700
From: jik- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.linux,alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.help,linux.redhat.development,linux.redhat.rpm
Subject: Re: RedHat Linux 5.2 Deluxe Operating System
Andrew Meyer wrote:
>
> I am a newbie to the Linux/unix envrionment and interested in becoming more
> knowledgeable. But lately for some reason whenenver I install a copy of
> RedHat's Linux 5.2 Deluxe OS during the install it wants me to specify the
> types of drives or something like that for the partitions. If you know
> anything about this then please e-mail me at [EMAIL PROTECTED] What are
> the specific drive names? Also what is the command for mounting a CDROM
> drive? and is there any GUI copmression utlility for Linux that is similar
> to Winzip or Aladdin? And please if you could help me with the C source
> code compiling it would mean a great deal to me!!!
Read the Linux Installation and Getting Started Guide which is a book
which can be downloaded or vewied at http://sunsite.unc.edu/LDP/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andrew Chung)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: AutoInstall is for experts, not beginners!!!
Date: 18 May 1999 02:50:59 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>They do seem to be lagging way behind the others distros though. They
>say they want to be sure their distribution is rock steady but I
>wonder how their "potato" would stand against Redhat's 6.0 or Suse's
>6.1 at the present time.
There's a VERY good reason why potato is called unstable.. At no point
does debian claim that the unstable branch is "rock steady". It's understood
that a lot of new stuff goes into potato and so there's an inherent level of
instability. And it seems RH6 has its own stability problems too....
--
Andrew Chung [EMAIL PROTECTED]
See http://anderoo.dhs.org/~anderoo/pgp.html for PGP key
It's a sin only if you dwell on the what ifs and the but ifs
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Scott Lanning)
Subject: Re: The Vi Lovers Home Page
Date: 18 May 1999 02:56:12 GMT
D. J. Birchall ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: * It understands regular expressions and supports them in global
:search and replace operations.
So does emacs. ESC-*
(What are some cool vi things; I'm seriously curious.)
: * It doesn't try to be a web browser.
: * It doesn't try to be a mail reader.
: * It doesn't try to be a news reader.
[etc]
But have you used emacs' FTP; it's sweet. You can fetch/edit documents
on an FTP account just as if it was on your own. And you can edit
gzipped files transparently in the same way.
"emacs /ftpuser@buphy:/var/httpd/ftpuser/foo.gz"
And writing programs with those bootiful colors, auto-indent, it's
hard to make a syntax error.
Heh heh, by the way, some other post in this thread was in Dutch
or something (I forget now), but I perfectly understood what he
meant. :) This topic always is a religious war. (I don't mean anyone
to think I'm serious or proselytizing, though; heathens can roast
in their self-inflicted torment.. :))
: * It runs on just about everything, even clunky old PC's with nothing
: but floppy drives.
Granted...but in that case I use pico.. I'm serious. I use it alot
for quick editing. alias pi='pico -k -m -n30 -t -w -x -z' <vroom vroom>
But for coding I always use emacs. I guess once I got used to it,
vi would be okay, too. It *MUST* have some neat features if it's
revered by some people.
--
Scott Lanning: [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://physics.bu.edu/~slanning
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andrew Chung)
Subject: Re: gnome RPMS suck??? + a few questions
Date: 18 May 1999 03:00:26 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 18 May 1999 00:09:02 +0100, D. Vrabel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> so question 1:
>>
>> by compiling the sources with prefix=/usr which redhat seems to use, am
>> i overwriting the RPMed files redhat put there?
>> This would be good cuz I dont gotta worry about conflicts... but not
>> sure wat happens in the lib directory...
Umm.. are you building just part of gnome or are you building everything you
need? Just putting built binaries into /usr won't necessarily solve all your
dependecy problems.
>> If not then do I have to uninstall all the offending RPMs first b4 I
>> compile?
I don't use RH, but I believe "rpm -e <package>" will remove <package>.
Check "man rpm"
>> wat does ldconfig do?
It checks where all the shared libraries are so that the linker can find the
correct library to import symbols from
>> is there anyway to install RPMs with those missing files?
depends on what you're missing...
>> wat are all those warnings during compiles?... like
>> warning, attempted redefinition of something something
Did you grab the sources from the CVS tree?
--
Andrew Chung [EMAIL PROTECTED]
See http://anderoo.dhs.org/~anderoo/pgp.html for PGP key
It's a sin only if you dwell on the what ifs and the but ifs
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (drub)
Subject: Re: FIXED(?): Staroffice/glibc problem
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 03:06:01 GMT
I dont seem to get an error but it echos just
:oldglibc:E::bin::/usr/i386-glibc20-linux/lib/ld-wrapper:
when I run /etc/rc.d/rc.binfmt
when I run setup it gives me the same message about glibc and all the
libraries
yet I have the COMPAT libs installed
oh well, I am probaly doing something wrong
Peter Englmaier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Yet another solution for the Staroffice/glibc problems.
>
>RH6.0 has problems with old glibc-2.0.7 binaries. Staroffice and
>many other programs do not work with the new glibc. Here is
>a workaround based on the 'misc. binary format' feature of
>the linux kernel. Even printing seems to work (at least for me).
>Please post if this does or does not work for you. Staroffice
>still gives some error message at startup, but works fine.
>
>Note: This may also fix other problems reported with the glibc.
>
>
>0) do *not* modify any staroffice scripts or binaries... (the easy
> step first)
>
>1) install the rpm's for
> compat-glibc-5.2-2.0.7.1
> compat-libs-5.2-1
>
>2) install the appended wrapper file in
> /usr/i386-glibc20-linux/lib/ld-wrapper
> and do
> chmod a=rx /usr/i386-glibc20-linux/lib/ld-wrapper
> This file will be used to run old applications.
>
>3) install the appended rc.binfmt file below in /etc/rc.d/
> make it execute:
> chmod a=rx rc.binfmt
> run rc.binfmt to activate it. If it produces error
> messages, you probably have no misc. binary format
> compiled in the kernel. You want to call the
> file from /etc/rc.d/rc.serial as well (add a line
> saying '/etc/rc.d/rc.binfmt'.
>
>This works as follows: when the kernel is asked to 'execute' a
>binary with extension '.bin', it runs the wrapper file instead.
>The wrapper loads the binary with the 'right' loader. To run
>other old binaries, e.g. 'goodie', simply do:
> mv goodie goodie.bin
> ln -s goodie.bin goodie
>
>BTW, if somebody finds out the 'magic' bytes of old binaries,
>the script could be triggered using the magic fingerprint.
>
>Peter.
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>ld-wrapper:
>#!/bin/sh
># wrapper for old glibc binaries
>
>p=`basename $1`
>if [ "$p" = "soffice.bin" -o "$p" = "psetup.bin" -o "$p" = "setup.bin"
>]; then
> exec /usr/i386-glibc20-linux/lib/ld-linux.so.2 --library-path
>/usr/i386-glibc20-linux/lib:$LD_LIBRARY_PATH "$@"
>fi
>
>exec /lib/ld-linux.so.2 "$@"
>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>rc.binfmt
>#!/bin/sh
>
>if /sbin/modprobe binfmt_misc.o ; then
># clear register first
> echo -1 >/proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc/status
> REGISTER=/proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc/register
># old glibc
> echo ':oldglibc:E::bin::/usr/i386-glibc20-linux/lib/ld-wrapper:'
>>${REGISTER}
>fi
>
------------------------------
From: "Robert A. Ober" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: CD Audio in RH6
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 03:29:15 GMT
Jeremy Nickolet wrote:
>
> "Robert A. Ober" wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Lost my cd audio after upgrade to RH6.0. Have sound working. Gnome
> > desktop sounds work. CD audio works in NT. Does not work on RH6, even
> > in fvwm2.
>
> You might not have the permissions set. As root try: chmod 666
> /dev/cdrom
>
> --
> Jeremy
> http://members.home.com/nickoljt/
Nope, thanks for trying. Will turn of pnp and see what happens.
Thanks:)
--
Robert A. Ober
Please reply to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charles E Taylor IV)
Subject: Re: In defence of UNIX man pages
Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 21:01:57 -0400
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Robert Hull <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I am talking about the subject under discussion - not some hypothetical
> book(s) that have nothing to do with a *technical* manual about
> Information Technology.
All we're doing here is arguing semantics. I hold that a good
technical reference (whatever the field) would contain examples.
You seem to hold the view that, somehow, having examples in a man
page makes them lose their essence. It boils down to personal
preference, much like emacs vs vi.
And the FSF deems we should dump man pages entirely.
--
========================================================
Charles E Taylor IV <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
========================================================
Visit me on the web!
http://orangesherbert.ces.clemson.edu
========================================================
------------------------------
From: Bob Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Vi Lovers Home Page
Date: 17 May 1999 22:31:21 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aqeel Mahesri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> UC Berkeley has officially appologized for the creation of the
> not-much-better-than-Windows-Notepad editor vi. Why do people still keep using
> it?
Hmmm...dunno about dat.
However...Bill Joy in a _Unix Review_ interview was less than enthusiastic
about his creation.
--
========================================================================
Bob Nelson -- Dallas, Texas, USA ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
http://www.oldradio.com/archives/nelson/open-computing.html
``Those who don't understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly.''
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject: Re: Registry in Linux ???
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 03:40:22 GMT
On Sat, 15 May 1999 16:22:33 +0200, Thomas Scholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>These packet managers are exactely what I ment with being just put on top of
>the os. As you said these managers (or comparable sw) don't recognize the
>stuff you put on the system, let's say manually, nor the stuff other apps
>might put on the system. So the data these managers are maintaining is
>"corrupt", not complete. The concept is wrong.
>
>Solution would be a database (integrated into the os, no user manipulation)
>that recognizes everything(!!!) that goes in and out of the system. This
>would provide system integrity.
Unfortunately, such a scheme establishes a new facility whose
robustness cannot exceed (assuming the use of the Bayes principle) the
multiple of:
a) How reliable the process of managing the creation of DB entries is,
b) How reliable the DB manager is,
c) How reliable the filesystem on which the DB is stored is.
Thus, if there's a problem with one of these things, the total
reliability suffers. And if there are significant problems with more
than one of these, reliability suffers *dramatically.*
Furthermore, this merely addresses "low level" reliability, which is
where the Windows Registry *first* falls down. It doesn't address
problems of "usefulness," which layers on further issues:
d) How reliably we may ensure that configuration changes are correctly
identified as such,
e) How useful the "metadata" is that seeks to provide the user with
*useful* information about the configuration change,
f) Whether or not there is a reliable transaction management system so
that if a configuration change is not successfully completed, both the
actual system changes *and the logging thereof* may be rolled back.
Note that f) crosses a line in that it fits as much with the "low level"
reliability side of the equation as it does with "usability."
>Ok, question is, if something like this is desirable.
The big problem is that "in the beginning," when the code base isn't
mature, the little problems in each area multiply to make it worse than
useless.
It's not much good unless you can leap from "no pervasive registry" to
an "extremely reliable pervasive registry." And it's not viable to
expect that to happen. Software doesn't start out perfect; it has to be
debugged.
All that being said, it would be *plausible* for something *moderately*
pervasive to grow into place, supposing we were able to combine:
a) A set of libraries supporting configuration management at the
application level, with an inclusion of some metadata so that a
"higher level" application is able to identify what application the
config data is for.
The extra metadata means that [for instance] a generic
"configuration manager" can scan files and identify what application
the config is for, and perhaps even meaningfully manipulate the
data.
b) Generic "config management" software that can read config files,
making reference to the libraries, and providing a multiplexed way
of reading, if not *all* configuration information, at least a
"whole whopping lot of it."
This does *not* represent a comprehensive mechanism that enforces that
*all* changes to files get "managed" as to their impact on system
configuration; I would argue that *that* represents an intractable
problem.
By encouraging apps to use some well-coded libraries that provide robust
mechanisms for managing the data, we may not get universal coverage of
all config, but this gives a way of moving towards getting better
control of *most* of it, which is a Good Thing.
Upshot of this is that people should *consider* using libPropList, or
libCFG, or opStore to manage configuration.
--
"Lumping configuration data, security data, kernel tuning parameters,
etc. into one monstrous fragile binary data structure is really dumb."
- David F. Skoll
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: New dumb question....
Date: 18 May 1999 04:44:29 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Peter F. DeMos scribbled manically:
: Hold on... I just went to verify what I just said, and this time it
: didn't work. Now I'm getting a "kernel does not recognize /dev/cdrom as
: a block device (maybe 'insmod driver'?)" message. I did not get this
: last night.... And when I go to the /cdrom dir, all I see is the . and
: .., just like last night. So obviously, I *am* doing something wrong.
Are you sure that /dev/cdrom is set up correctly? What happens
when you type 'file /dev/cdrom'? On my (working!) system, it looks like
this...
alderamin:~>file /dev/cdrom
/dev/cdrom: symbolic link to /dev/hdc
/dev/cdrom is never, AFAIK, an actual device, just a link to one. If your
CDROM is the first device on the second IDE bus, try mounting /dev/hdc like
you were trying to mount /dev/cdrom.
If the link _is_ correct...then I'm at a bit of a loss. Possibly
you need a driver, if your CDROM is nonstandard.
JD
--
"Corporations can't teach hacking. It has to be in you."
--Emmanuel Goldstein
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (brian moore)
Subject: Re: old elvis mouse behavior lost? Re: The Vi Lovers Home Page
Date: 18 May 1999 03:51:13 GMT
On 18 May 1999 02:37:24 GMT,
Cameron Spitzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I was a big fan of elvis-1.8, mainly for its integration of
> "mouse-click" into the cursor-motion commands.
> (When TERM=xterm, anyway.)
> But Steve removed that great feature in elvis-2.0, and I find
> elvis-1.8 no longer builds and runs in the modern libraries.
> (Elvis-2 creates its own windows under X, which is no good when
> your X surface is on the wrong end of a modem line from where
> elvis is running.)
>
> I see "mouse support" in vim's feature list, but it seems
> equally dependent on X. Am I reading it wrong?
> Has the greatest vi extension ever been sacrificed to pretty GUIs?
> Is there any modern vi clone that uses the mouse in an xterm
> the way elvis-1.8 did?
Tried vile? ('set xterm-mouse' sounds like what you want.)
--
Brian Moore | "The Zen nature of a spammer resembles
Sysadmin, C/Perl Hacker | a cockroach, except that the cockroach
Usenet Vandal | is higher up on the evolutionary chain."
Netscum, Bane of Elves. Peter Olson, Delphi Postmaster
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.misc) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Misc Digest
******************************
