To: Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Attn: Newbies Re: Random "Broken Pipe"
** Reply to note from Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mon, 23 Mar
1998 14:19:06 +0100
>
> On Sun, Mar 22, 1998 at 11:31:10PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > ** Reply to note from Art Lemasters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mon, 23 Mar 1998
> >
> > 00:20:29 -0600 (CST)
> > >
> > > default, or my bo was broken. In any case, less was an excellent idea
> > > for a default for manpage paging.
> >
> > Quite honestly I can't think of any DOS, Windows or OS/2 text file viewer
> >
> > program I've used over the last 10 years that didn't have the simple
> > features of search and page up/down and backscroll. I couldn't believe my
> >
> > senses weren't playing tricks on me the first time I installed Debian Linux
> >
> > and found out the default file viewer didn't include page up/down! <grin>
>
> Well, the Debian base system is minimalistic, and tehre is a good reason for
> it: Not every computer does need less!
>
> (A hint: a computer without a monitor and keyboard attached, e.g. servers).
It would seem to follow then, for this kind of setup where no monitor is
present, then using
more would be as inane as using less for "viewing text". Besides which, the
discussion
wasn't about setting up servers.......it was about setting up a USEABLE default
install for
NEWBIES. Most installations are NOT going to be set up as servers, regardless
of whether or
not they include keyboard and/or monitor, when being installed by newbies......
>
> However, all computers need a minimal set of working programs to fix the
> system when it breaks down. "more" is smaller than "less", and more is on
> the root file system (/bin/more), whereas less is on the usr partition
> (/usr/bin/less). So you have more available even when you can't mount the
> usr partition because it died yesterday. more is on the base disks, and less
> is a package that you have to install. more is even on the resque disk.
I don't mean to be rude here, but quite honestly this sounds like something
that may have
applied years ago when running resource and hardware limited systems. I'll
repeat my original
statement "> > Quite honestly I can't think of any DOS, Windows or OS/2 text
file viewer
program I've used over the last 10 years that didn't have the simple features
of search and
page up/down and backscroll. " If it takes a second floppy disk to round out
a decent set of
emergency programs then what's the big deal about that? In fact, IMHO, the
benefits gained by
having access to page up/down/search far outway the limitations inflicted by
using a text file
viewer that will only read in one direction, ESPECIALLY in emergency
conditions.
> See, you don't have to think that we don't know to use our tools.
Quite honestly if these are the best reasons for not including less as the
default, IMHO you are
deluding yourself as to whether or not you know how to use your tools. <Again I
don't mean to
be rude by saying this......my experience with dos, windows and OS/2 over the
years shows
clearly that this reasoning is bogus and outdated. <shruug>)
> We could
> make the system flashy and hype. We could print color ansi startup pictures,
> and a cool sound whenever a user logins ("TATAAA") and all that stuff.
Noone was talking about making a flashy startup system.......the crux of the
matter was making
usable tools available as the DEFAULT rather than some archiac program that
should have seen
retirement years ago.
>
> We don't do it by default for technical reasons.
>
> Because we know it better. ;)
If you are one of the current Debian developers, then might I politely suggest
you do some
rethinking on this matter. This whole topic was started by a chap who was
thrilled by finding
out the hamm release included less as the default.........take a poll and see
how many pro more
responses you get back when asking the questions:
"If you were a newbie installing linux for the first time, would you rather
have a text file
viewer that 1) did not include page up/down or search functions or 2) a text
file viewer that
did include those functions?"
"For a default viewer on a system would you rather have a text file viewer that
1) did not
include page up/down or search functions or 2) a text file viewer that did
include those
functions?"
"On your emergency disk(s) would you rather have a text file viewer that 1) did
not include
page up/down or search functions or 2) a text file viewer that did include
those functions?"
I don't think a person has to be a genius to figure out what the majority of
responses are going
to be. <grin>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
