On Thu, 20 Mar 2003 00:20:39 +0100 "Marco d'Itri" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mar 19, Will Yardley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Yes, but mutt (normally) obeys VISUAL if present - it's only the
> >Debian package which seems not to.
> Maybe you think this because the debian package is a 1.5 snaphost, and
> handling of $EDITOR and $VISUAL has changed since 1.4 (something else
> needed to be fixed, maybe this broken something too...).
>
> I will *not* further discuss this with the mutt upstream unless
> somebody will provide reference to authoritative documentation about
> the correct semantics of $EDITOR and $VISUAL (I could not find any)
> and a patch implementing this.
The first relevant document I found was the tcsh manual page[1], which
states that:
EDITOR The pathname to a default editor. See also the VISUAL
environment variable and the run-fg-editor editor command.
VISUAL The pathname to a default full-screen editor. See also the
EDITOR environment variable and the run-fg-editor editor com-
mand.
It is also my experience and belief that VISUAL takes precedence over
EDITOR for interactive editing.
I will have a quick look to see if there's anything else that agrees
with this point of view.
LINKS
[1] tcsh manual page
<http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=tcsh&apropos=0&sektion=0&manp
ath=FreeBSD+5.0-current&format=html>
--
Michael Wardle
Adacel Technologies
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
