Re: [LUAU] Re: [buug] nano help!!!!
Vince Hoang wrote: The solution is the same in both: fix the PATH. For tcsh, the OP will want to add something like the following to your .tcshrc file: set PATH = ($PATH /usr/local/bin) Using a symlink will work too, but using a custom PATH will continue to work for other local package installations. In my experience with tcsh, $PATH is set by setenv, and is : separated, whereas $path is handled by set, and is space separated. So you'd want setenv PATH $PATH:/usr/local/bin or set path=($path /usr/local/bin) My point that a lot of people missed was someone wrote in saying basically I would like to use nano. I went out of my way to install it, because I am familiar with it and enjoy it. Sean wrote back saying basically, I recognize that you've probably seen vi and hate it enough to drive you to go out of your way to install nano, but you're wrong, and you need to use vi. Do you ever wonder why vi was written in 1976, but in 1984, 1999, and 2000 respectively, people had the audacity to publicly release emacs, nano, and gedit, when vi is clearly better? The answer is that not everybody likes vi. Some people will never like vi. Some people have used it extensively, either when it was necessary, or to give it a chance, are familiar with it, proficient, and still hate it. If you grabbed 100 people off the street, gave them a copy of nano and a copy of vi, and told them go, I think you'd see my point. The point is not which editor is the best. The point is that if someone says I'm having trouble with A, the answer of A sucks, use B is usually inappropriate. I have yet to find this hypothetical system that has vi, but doesn't have emacs, noxemacs, nano, pico, nedit, gedit, kwrite, jed, or joe; the ability to install one of these easier to use editors, or a file transfer utility that would allow you to do your editing remotely. Maybe I'm fortunate that I work for a company whose servers are all from the last 2 decades. -Eric Hattemer ___ LUAU@lists.hosef.org mailing list http://lists.hosef.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luau
Re: [LUAU] Re: [buug] nano help!!!!
On 10/20/07, Eric Hattemer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have yet to find this hypothetical system that has vi, but doesn't have emacs, noxemacs, nano, pico, nedit, gedit, kwrite, jed, or joe; the ability to install one of these easier to use editors, or a file transfer utility that would allow you to do your editing remotely. I gather that the justification for learning vi is that if your system is hosed, vi will work when other editors are unavailable. Hence you should use vi at all times, so that you can deal with problems. I don't see why you couldn't learn enough vi to deal with problems, and use another editor under ordinary circumstances. Sure, you'll be slower in vi, and perhaps curse a lot, but you can still use it. -- Karen Lofstrom ___ LUAU@lists.hosef.org mailing list http://lists.hosef.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luau
Re: [LUAU] Re: [buug] nano help!!!!
Eric Hattemer wrote: Vince Hoang wrote: The solution is the same in both: fix the PATH. For tcsh, the OP will want to add something like the following to your .tcshrc file: set PATH = ($PATH /usr/local/bin) Using a symlink will work too, but using a custom PATH will continue to work for other local package installations. In my experience with tcsh, $PATH is set by setenv, and is : separated, whereas $path is handled by set, and is space separated. So you'd want setenv PATH $PATH:/usr/local/bin or set path=($path /usr/local/bin) My point that a lot of people missed was someone wrote in saying basically I would like to use nano. I went out of my way to install it, because I am familiar with it and enjoy it. Sean wrote back saying basically, I recognize that you've probably seen vi and hate it enough to drive you to go out of your way to install nano, but you're wrong, and you need to use vi. Do you ever wonder why vi was written in 1976, but in 1984, 1999, and 2000 respectively, people had the audacity to publicly release emacs, nano, and gedit, when vi is clearly better? The answer is that not everybody likes vi. Some people will never like vi. Some people have used it extensively, either when it was necessary, or to give it a chance, are familiar with it, proficient, and still hate it. If you grabbed 100 people off the street, gave them a copy of nano and a copy of vi, and told them go, I think you'd see my point. The point is not which editor is the best. The point is that if someone says I'm having trouble with A, the answer of A sucks, use B is usually inappropriate. I have yet to find this hypothetical system that has vi, but doesn't have emacs, noxemacs, nano, pico, nedit, gedit, kwrite, jed, or joe; the ability to install one of these easier to use editors, or a file transfer utility that would allow you to do your editing remotely. Maybe I'm fortunate that I work for a company whose servers are all from the last 2 decades. -Eric Hattemer ___ LUAU@lists.hosef.org mailing list http://lists.hosef.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luau Aloha Eric, Long time you been away. I use vi when I have to but always install pico on the FreeBSD boxes. ~Al Plant - Honolulu, Hawaii - Phone: 808-284-2740 + http://hawaiidakine.com + http://freebsdinfo.org + [EMAIL PROTECTED] + + http://internetohana.org - Supporting - FreeBSD 6.* - 7.* + All that's really worth doing is what we do for others.- Lewis Carrol ___ LUAU@lists.hosef.org mailing list http://lists.hosef.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luau
Re: [LUAU] Re: [buug] nano help!!!!
Hi Karen, I agree with your statement. everyone should learn vi. The reason why I wanted to install nano is that I just wanted to try something new.. =) Karen Lofstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 10/20/07, Eric Hattemer wrote: I have yet to find this hypothetical system that has vi, but doesn't have emacs, noxemacs, nano, pico, nedit, gedit, kwrite, jed, or joe; the ability to install one of these easier to use editors, or a file transfer utility that would allow you to do your editing remotely. I gather that the justification for learning vi is that if your system is hosed, vi will work when other editors are unavailable. Hence you should use vi at all times, so that you can deal with problems. I don't see why you couldn't learn enough vi to deal with problems, and use another editor under ordinary circumstances. Sure, you'll be slower in vi, and perhaps curse a lot, but you can still use it. -- Karen Lofstrom ___ LUAU@lists.hosef.org mailing list http://lists.hosef.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luau __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ LUAU@lists.hosef.org mailing list http://lists.hosef.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luau
Re: [LUAU] Re: [buug] nano help!!!!
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 808.356.2913 wrote: this might not sound nice but use 'vi' not 'nano' you will never feel any editor woes again Sean http://www.kokuatraffic.com You're right, it doesn't sound nice. It sounds elitist and stupid. -Eric Hattemer ___ LUAU@lists.hosef.org mailing list http://lists.hosef.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luau
Re: [LUAU] Re: [buug] nano help!!!!
You dispute recomending people use vi which is a superior editor? Almost all systems have vi installed and in the default path.. not the case for nano. What is more elitist is not encouraging people to use the proper tools! Sean On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 9:29 pm, Eric Hattemer wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 808.356.2913 wrote: this might not sound nice but use 'vi' not 'nano' you will never feel any editor woes again Sean http://www.kokuatraffic.com You're right, it doesn't sound nice. It sounds elitist and stupid. -Eric Hattemer ___ LUAU@lists.hosef.org mailing list http://lists.hosef.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luau ___ LUAU@lists.hosef.org mailing list http://lists.hosef.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luau
Re: [LUAU] Re: [buug] nano help!!!!
On Wednesday,2007-10-17 21:44:36 Sean Fairchild wrote: You dispute recomending people use vi which is a superior editor? Almost all systems have vi installed and in the default path.. not the case for nano. What is more elitist is not encouraging people to use the proper tools! Different strokes for different folks. That's the true freedom of free software... pick any of the many free editors, or write your own. So, do we really need another holy war? 'cause if so, you folks are barking up the wrong tree... the REAL holy war is vi vs emacs. -- Copyright 2007 Angela Kahealani. All rights reserve without prejudice. All information and transactions are private between the parties, and are non negotiable. http://www.kahealani.com/ It's *all* just choice. ___ LUAU@lists.hosef.org mailing list http://lists.hosef.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luau
Re: [LUAU] Re: [buug] nano help!!!!
Angela Kahealani wrote: the REAL holy war is vi vs emacs. I've always heard about this one. Is there a story behind it other than a pointless argument over superlatives? The real question of this thread is did either Peter's or Antonio's suggestions work? They included the inquisitor when they responded. I wonder if he let either of you know if your response worked? --scott ___ LUAU@lists.hosef.org mailing list http://lists.hosef.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luau
Re: [LUAU] Re: [buug] nano help!!!!
On Wednesday,2007-10-17 22:37:32 R. Scott Belford wrote: I've always heard about this one. Is there a story behind it other than a pointless argument over superlatives? my point exactly... these things are not resolvable, because different people / circumstances yield different optimizations. -- Copyright 2007 Angela Kahealani. All rights reserve without prejudice. All information and transactions are private between the parties, and are non negotiable. http://www.kahealani.com/ It's *all* just choice. ___ LUAU@lists.hosef.org mailing list http://lists.hosef.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luau
Re: [LUAU] Re: [buug] nano help!!!!
ah sorry I think I miss something =) Angela Kahealani [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wednesday,2007-10-17 22:37:32 R. Scott Belford wrote: I've always heard about this one. Is there a story behind it other than a pointless argument over superlatives? my point exactly... these things are not resolvable, because different people / circumstances yield different optimizations. -- Copyright 2007 Angela Kahealani. All rights reserve without prejudice. All information and transactions are private between the parties, and are non negotiable. http://www.kahealani.com/ It's *all* just choice. ___ LUAU@lists.hosef.org mailing list http://lists.hosef.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luau __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ LUAU@lists.hosef.org mailing list http://lists.hosef.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luau
Re: [LUAU] Re: [buug] nano help!!!!
On 10/16/07, Peter Besenbruch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: goku ball z wrote: setenv EDITOR/usr/local/bin/./nano ( which didn't work ) then I tried this also setenv EDITOR/usr/local/bin/nano (which also didn't work) Setting the EDITOR only helps when you use a program that calls an editor such as crontab, mutt and pine. What about putting a link in /usr/bin to your Nano executable? I don't run Suse, but that's what Debian does. It's odd that they would put Nano in /usr/local/bin, as that usually isn't in the path. Try man ln. Frankly, I find it easier to do links with Midnight Commander, sometimes called mc. It is a BSD thing to install packages under /usr/local, but since the problem is on SuSE, I suspect in this case it was a local install from the source package (sh configure make sudo make install). NetOpsCenter wrote: I run FreeBSD here in Hawaii, but I added the LUAU list to this email. Plenty local Linux users on it could maybe help you. Whatever works. The solution is the same in both: fix the PATH. For tcsh, the OP will want to add something like the following to your .tcshrc file: set PATH = ($PATH /usr/local/bin) Using a symlink will work too, but using a custom PATH will continue to work for other local package installations. -Vince ___ LUAU@lists.hosef.org mailing list http://lists.hosef.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luau
Re: [LUAU] Re: [buug] nano help!!!!
goku ball z wrote: Hi all, I have this problem. I am running suse linux 10.0 Enterprise. I was able to install nano-2.0.6 and as root I am able to use it. This is where my problem starts. When I exit root and try to use nano, I get this error message. nano: Command not found. but when I type /usr/local/bin/./nano I am able to use it. and since I am using tcsh shell I made a file called .cshrc and added the following: setenv EDITOR/usr/local/bin/./nano ( which didn't work ) then I tried this also setenv EDITOR/usr/local/bin/nano (which also didn't work) can someone out there help this hawaii newbie?! thanks and aloha from hawaii What about putting a link in /usr/bin to your Nano executable? I don't run Suse, but that's what Debian does. It's odd that they would put Nano in /usr/local/bin, as that usually isn't in the path. Try man ln. Frankly, I find it easier to do links with Midnight Commander, sometimes called mc. NetOpsCenter wrote: Aloha! I run FreeBSD here in Hawaii, but I added the LUAU list to this email. Plenty local Linux users on it could maybe help you. Whatever works. -- Hawaiian Astronomical Society: http://www.hawastsoc.org HAS Deepsky Atlas: http://www.hawastsoc.org/deepsky ___ LUAU@lists.hosef.org mailing list http://lists.hosef.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luau
Re: [LUAU] Re: [buug] nano help!!!!
goku ball z wrote: Hi all, I have this problem. I am running suse linux 10.0 Enterprise. I was able to install nano-2.0.6 and as root I am able to use it. This is where my problem starts. When I exit root and try to use nano, I get this error message. nano: Command not found. but when I type /usr/local/bin/./nano I am able to use it. and since I am using tcsh shell I made a file called .cshrc and added the following: setenv EDITOR/usr/local/bin/./nano ( which didn't work ) then I tried this also setenv EDITOR/usr/local/bin/nano (which also didn't work) Not sure if you're pasting in some corrupted text but shouldn't there be a space between 'EDITOR' and '/usr'? Also, you may find it easier to set your PATH to include /usr/local/bin. Antonio Querubin whois: AQ7-ARIN ___ LUAU@lists.hosef.org mailing list http://lists.hosef.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luau
