Le Mon, 25 Sep 2006 04:35:06 +1000, Grant a écrit*:

> On Sun, 24 Sep 2006 16:43:57 +0200, Loki Harfagr <loki@DarkDesign.free.fr> wrote:
>
>>Le Sun, 24 Sep 2006 11:31:57 +1000, Grant a écrit*:
>>
>>> On Sun, 24 Sep 2006 11:07:13 +1000, Steve Youngs <steve@youngs.au.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> >> what about some good ole infighting about emac vs. vi? yeah ...
>>>>
>>>> > What's the point, the battle's won - XEmacs rules :-)
>>>
>>> Bullsh*t!!! Vim rules )
>>
>> Vim is a space eater, elVIs rules !
>> We dun't need nuh fancy colors to spoil da readability !-)
>
> NEdit looking better now but can i get it to use truetype fonts?

Er ... Why would you use TTF ?
And IMNHATAO, syntax coloration is a whitecane to the deaf, or an
ear-aid for the blind, I mean it produces much more irating noise than
helpful info (and that only in the barely met cases the conf file is
correct )

I'd say the best syntax automated tool is the percent key, the
rest is for slashdododoters ;P)

> Quite
> weird to have a unix app like NEdit up on 'doze...

Well, why not? Nothing wrong in Windows except the OS ;-)

On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 19:54:02 +0200, Loki Harfagr <loki@DarkDesign.free.fr> wrote:

>Le Mon, 25 Sep 2006 04:35:06 +1000, Grant a écrit*:
....
>> NEdit looking better now but can i get it to use truetype fonts?
>
> Er ... Why would you use TTF ?

Readability for mine old eyes, young grasshopper

> And IMNHATAO, syntax coloration is a whitecane to the deaf, or an
>ear-aid for the blind, I mean it produces much more irating noise than
>helpful info (and that only in the barely met cases the conf file is
>correct )

Before I met slackware, I was using NEdit + IceWM over VNC on an 800x600
screen at home, slackware taught me vim could do syntax colouring -- so I
forgot the vnc stuff.

On windows UltraEdit 8.1 is what I like, not seen anything like it for
linux
>
> I'd say the best syntax automated tool is the percent key, the

What? As in printf?

>rest is for slashdododoters ;P)

Not me
>
>> Quite
>> weird to have a unix app like NEdit up on 'doze...
>
> Well, why not? Nothing wrong in Windows except the OS ;-)

I like their desktop, sans winxp eye-candy. WinXP doesn't blue screen,
still likes a reboot once or twice a week to stay 'nice'...

Cheers,
Grant.
--
http://bugsplatter.mine.nu/

On Sat, 23 Sep 2006 10:43:08 -0500, SuperDaemon wrote:
> Damjan wrote:
>
>>
>>>> Thanks for the reply, however this change did not have the desired
>>>> effect. Clicking on a .doc attachment still calls up kword.
>>>
>>> Ahhh.
>>
>> And I thought he was crazy to wish OpenOffice as an editor in KMail ))
>>
>>> The default editor is just to write e-mails.
>>>
>>> You want to change KDE's default association/mimetype for doc's.
>>> Konqueror: Settings - Configure Konqueror - Default Associations.
>>
>>
>
> what is happening to this group? or to slackware itself? Is everyone running
> KDE now? what about some good ole infighting about emac vs. vi? yeah ...
>
> KDE is fine but, where are the challenges? what about some good fights about
> newsreader preferences (srln vs. others).
>
> this gettin to be very boring ....

Whats to fight about?
Vi (elvis) is keen,
Emacs is keen,
Slackware (console) is very keen.




--
greymaus
Just Another Grumpy Old Man

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 2006-09-24, Steve Youngs <steve@youngs.au.com> wrote:
> >> what about some good ole infighting about emac vs. vi? yeah ...
>
> > What's the point, the battle's won - XEmacs rules :-)
>
> ahem... SXEmacs :-)

I'd like to see you guys try to run those one some of the computer I
operate. Good luck! And when the Solaris box you were called in to
fix has a full filesystem, and you have to edit your config files
because it's auto-magic tools have died, you'll be thanking the
Almighty that you listened to +Alan Hicks+ and learned how to use vi
like a real geek. After all, GNU is Gnu's Not Unix, and Emacs is GNU,
so by definition, Emacs ain't UNIX, and it ain't in any stock UNIX
machine, but some clone of vi is, garaunteed.

- --
It is better to hear the rebuke of the wise,
Than for a man to hear the song of fools.
Ecclesiastes 7:5
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFG+vuz8zcalmVmBkRAj1UAJ9D6Sc5D2xOzpSp4vIklm kxBGZjcACaA+Nc
yRv/XIVA5dWgJCLOZ4ELAOM=
=zWMJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

+Alan Hicks+ <alan@lizella.netWORK> writes:

> On 2006-09-24, Steve Youngs <steve@youngs.au.com> wrote:
>> >> what about some good ole infighting about emac vs. vi? yeah ...
>>
>> > What's the point, the battle's won - XEmacs rules :-)
>>
>> ahem... SXEmacs :-)
>
> I'd like to see you guys try to run those one some of the computer I
> operate. Good luck! And when the Solaris box you were called in to
> fix has a full filesystem, and you have to edit your config files
> because it's auto-magic tools have died, you'll be thanking the
> Almighty that you listened to +Alan Hicks+ and learned how to use vi
> like a real geek. After all, GNU is Gnu's Not Unix, and Emacs is GNU,
> so by definition, Emacs ain't UNIX, and it ain't in any stock UNIX
> machine, but some clone of vi is, garaunteed.

:-)

Who said we couldn't use vi? We just wouldn't want to!!

Would it not be possible to do a remote edit with tramp in this
situation? Steve?

atb


Glyn

:q

byeeeeeeeeeeee

Glyn Millington <wistanswick@linuxmail.org> writes:

> +Alan Hicks+ <alan@lizella.netWORK> writes:
>
>> On 2006-09-24, Steve Youngs <steve@youngs.au.com> wrote:
>>> >> what about some good ole infighting about emac vs. vi? yeah ...
>>>
>>> > What's the point, the battle's won - XEmacs rules :-)
>>>
>>> ahem... SXEmacs :-)
>>
>> I'd like to see you guys try to run those one some of the computer I
>> operate. Good luck! And when the Solaris box you were called in to
>> fix has a full filesystem, and you have to edit your config files
>> because it's auto-magic tools have died, you'll be thanking the
>> Almighty that you listened to +Alan Hicks+ and learned how to use vi
>> like a real geek. After all, GNU is Gnu's Not Unix, and Emacs is GNU,
>> so by definition, Emacs ain't UNIX, and it ain't in any stock UNIX
>> machine, but some clone of vi is, garaunteed.
>
> :-)
>
> Who said we couldn't use vi? We just wouldn't want to!!

Sorry to follow up to myself, but honesty demands ..... to be fair, I
would use vi (or better vim) for quick editing jobs as root. I know it
can be done with XEmacs and ssh, but I like to keep my hand in with vi(m).
Indeed I got into Linux in the first place because Vim was the best text
editor I had found and wanted to use it in its native environment.

So not I'm not really a combatant in the editor wars thing ... I could
live with Vim for sure - on the other hand I couldn't do without Gnus
now, and playing around with elisp stuff is fun....


atb




Glyn
--
RTFM http://www.tldp.org/index.html
GAFC http://slackbook.org/ The Official Source :-)
STFW http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...inux.slackware
JFGI http://jfgi.us/

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
NotDashEscaped: You need GnuPG to verify this message

* +Alan Hicks+ <+Alan> writes:

> On 2006-09-24, Steve Youngs <steve@youngs.au.com> wrote:
>> >> what about some good ole infighting about emac vs. vi? yeah ...
>>
>> > What's the point, the battle's won - XEmacs rules :-)
>>
>> ahem... SXEmacs :-)

> I'd like to see you guys try to run those one some of the computer
> I operate.

They'd have to be very unusual setups before emacs wouldn't run on
them.

> And when the Solaris box you were called in to fix has a full
> filesystem, and you have to edit your config files

If it was my system or one of my customers' I would have installed
emacs on it long before the filesystem filled up. :-)

> listened to +Alan Hicks+ and learned how to use vi

Who said we didn't know how to use it?

> After all, GNU is Gnu's Not Unix, and Emacs is GNU, so by definition,
> Emacs ain't UNIX, and it ain't in any stock UNIX machine, but some
> clone of vi is, garaunteed.

Good thing (S)XEmacs ain't GNU, and I have the ability to install the
software I want to use. :-)

--
|---<Steve Youngs>---------------<GnuPG KeyID: A94B3003>---|
| Genius - Is the ability to reduce |
| the complicated to the simple |
|----------------------------------<steve@youngs.au.com>---|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: The SXEmacs Project <http://www.sxemacs.org>
Comment: Eicq - The SXEmacs ICQ Client <http://www.eicq.org/>

iEYEARECAAYFAkUcP/sACgkQHSfbS6lLMAMZjACeLh+hxQimwY4yjxnqcRymBzn0
UiYAoL5vNC3ZjquPAT0lJqZvWYzUlsjr
=W3qJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

+Alan Hicks+ <alan@lizella.network> trolled:

> I'd like to see you guys try to run those one some of the computer
> I operate. Good luck! And when the Solaris box you were called
> in to fix has a full filesystem, and you have to edit your config
> files because it's auto-magic tools have died, you'll be thanking
> the Almighty that you listened to +Alan Hicks+ and learned how to
> use vi like a real geek.

Actually, the "real geeks" use vim, not vi. But you wouldn't know
that because you are a bozo. Can you tell us why you pollute this
ng with pgp trash? And can you tell us why you put ++ signs around
your name? Is it because troll -Cibahole- did? And you want so
much to be like him?

You are a cowardly piece of garbage. A waste of skin.

We don't want you here.

Bugger off.

cordially, even to pure sewage,

rm

Glyn Millington <wistanswick@linuxmail.org> trolled:
> +Alan Hicks+ <alan@lizella.netWORK> writes:

Hicks is a cowardly little troll. Ignore him. Because if you
don't, it's likely that we will ignore you.

cordially, as always,

rm

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
NotDashEscaped: You need GnuPG to verify this message

* Glyn Millington <wistanswick@linuxmail.org> writes:

> +Alan Hicks+ <alan@lizella.netWORK> writes:
>> On 2006-09-24, Steve Youngs <steve@youngs.au.com> wrote:
>>> >> what about some good ole infighting about emac vs. vi? yeah ...
>>>
>>> > What's the point, the battle's won - XEmacs rules :-)
>>>
>>> ahem... SXEmacs :-)
>>
>> I'd like to see you guys try to run those one some of the computer I
>> operate. Good luck! And when the Solaris box you were called in to
>> fix has a full filesystem, and you have to edit your config files
>> because it's auto-magic tools have died, you'll be thanking the
>> Almighty that you listened to +Alan Hicks+ and learned how to use vi
>> like a real geek. After all, GNU is Gnu's Not Unix, and Emacs is GNU,
>> so by definition, Emacs ain't UNIX, and it ain't in any stock UNIX
>> machine, but some clone of vi is, garaunteed.

> :-)

> Who said we couldn't use vi? We just wouldn't want to!!

> Would it not be possible to do a remote edit with tramp in this
> situation? Steve?

Yes, definitely. I do so all the time.

--
|---<Steve Youngs>---------------<GnuPG KeyID: A94B3003>---|
| Genius - Is the ability to reduce |
| the complicated to the simple |
|----------------------------------<steve@youngs.au.com>---|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: The SXEmacs Project <http://www.sxemacs.org>
Comment: Eicq - The SXEmacs ICQ Client <http://www.eicq.org/>

iEYEARECAAYFAkUcRAwACgkQHSfbS6lLMANDFgCeJa28BPPQpB klu0njLs9XdG/Y
xhwAn0q+quSnSoGVChfqA33Jk/xLUiBC
=mNsX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----