2014-11-28 23:41 GMT+01:00 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek :
> On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 09:48:55PM +0100, Ronny Chevalier wrote:
>> 2014-10-29 16:22 GMT+01:00 Ronny Chevalier :
>> > It helps editing units by either creating a drop-in file, like
>> > /etc/systemd/system/my.service.d/override.conf, or by
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 09:48:55PM +0100, Ronny Chevalier wrote:
> 2014-10-29 16:22 GMT+01:00 Ronny Chevalier :
> > It helps editing units by either creating a drop-in file, like
> > /etc/systemd/system/my.service.d/override.conf, or by copying the
> > original unit from /usr/lib/systemd/ to /etc/s
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 04:22:02PM +0100, Ronny Chevalier wrote:
> It helps editing units by either creating a drop-in file, like
> /etc/systemd/system/my.service.d/override.conf, or by copying the
> original unit from /usr/lib/systemd/ to /etc/systemd/ if the --full
> option is specified.
>
> It
2014-10-29 16:22 GMT+01:00 Ronny Chevalier :
> It helps editing units by either creating a drop-in file, like
> /etc/systemd/system/my.service.d/override.conf, or by copying the
> original unit from /usr/lib/systemd/ to /etc/systemd/ if the --full
> option is specified.
>
> It invokes an editor on
It helps editing units by either creating a drop-in file, like
/etc/systemd/system/my.service.d/override.conf, or by copying the
original unit from /usr/lib/systemd/ to /etc/systemd/ if the --full
option is specified.
It invokes an editor on temporary files related to the unit files and
if the edi
It helps editing units by either creating a drop-in file, like
/etc/systemd/system/my.service.d/override.conf, or by copying the
original unit from /usr/lib/systemd/ to /etc/systemd/ if the --full
option is specified.
It invokes an editor on temporary files related to the unit files and
if the edi
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 1:24 PM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> Does this make sense?
Speaking as a nano user and someone who barely knows how to quit vim,
I still think the decision of the default editor should be "vi" or the
distribution's choice.
___
sy
2014-10-13 13:40 GMT+02:00 David Herrmann :
> Hi
Hi,
>
> On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 8:17 PM, Daniel Buch wrote:
>> Nice, I was in the process of implementing this. Looks good to me. But I
>> think it would be better to use "vi" instead of "vim" if no &editor is set.
>> Vim is not installed on every
On Mon, 13.10.14 15:13, Simon McVittie (simon.mcvit...@collabora.co.uk) wrote:
> On 13/10/14 14:38, Dale R. Worley wrote:
> > My general understanding is that the traditional behavior when "you
> > need an editor but the user hasn't specified one" is to use "vi", and
> > so people who don't want "
On Fri, 17.10.14 15:45, Mantas Mikulėnas (graw...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 3:11 PM, Lennart Poettering
> wrote:
> > On Fri, 17.10.14 14:29, Mantas Mikulėnas (graw...@gmail.com) wrote:
> >
> >> > Technically proficient people will set $EDITOR or $VISUAL
> >> > anyway. Non-techni
> From: Mantas Mikulėnas
> Normally $VISUAL would be first, followed by $EDITOR...
>
> (But in practice nobody sets them to different values anyway, since no
> programs aside from mailx care about the distinction. So it's fine
> either way, and just ignoring $VISUAL would be just as good.)
I ra
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 3:11 PM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> On Fri, 17.10.14 14:29, Mantas Mikulėnas (graw...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
>> > Technically proficient people will set $EDITOR or $VISUAL
>> > anyway. Non-technical people won't. Non-technical people are likel to
>> > be totally lost in vi/vi
On Fri, 17.10.14 13:30, David Timothy Strauss (da...@davidstrauss.net) wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 1:24 PM, Lennart Poettering
> wrote:
> > Does this make sense?
>
> Speaking as a nano user and someone who barely knows how to quit vim,
> I still think the decision of the default editor shou
On Fri, 17.10.14 14:29, Mantas Mikulėnas (graw...@gmail.com) wrote:
> > Technically proficient people will set $EDITOR or $VISUAL
> > anyway. Non-technical people won't. Non-technical people are likel to
> > be totally lost in vi/vim. For those folks probably nano makes a
> > better choice, simply
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> On Mon, 13.10.14 13:40, David Herrmann (dh.herrm...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 8:17 PM, Daniel Buch
>> wrote:
>> > Nice, I was in the process of implementing this. Looks good to me. But I
>> > think it woul
On Mon, 13.10.14 13:40, David Herrmann (dh.herrm...@gmail.com) wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 8:17 PM, Daniel Buch wrote:
> > Nice, I was in the process of implementing this. Looks good to me. But I
> > think it would be better to use "vi" instead of "vim" if no &editor is set.
> > Vim
My general understanding is equal to dale. But with some consideration it
led me to agree with the warning approach. Its no big deal setting EDITOR.
Den 14/10/2014 01.06 skrev "Ronny Chevalier" :
> 2014-10-13 16:13 GMT+02:00 Simon McVittie >:
> > On 13/10/14 14:38, Dale R. Worley wrote:
> >> My g
2014-10-13 16:13 GMT+02:00 Simon McVittie :
> On 13/10/14 14:38, Dale R. Worley wrote:
>> My general understanding is that the traditional behavior when "you
>> need an editor but the user hasn't specified one" is to use "vi", and
>> so people who don't want "vi" *always* set $VISUAL in their
>> en
On 13/10/14 14:38, Dale R. Worley wrote:
> My general understanding is that the traditional behavior when "you
> need an editor but the user hasn't specified one" is to use "vi", and
> so people who don't want "vi" *always* set $VISUAL in their
> environment.
The Right Thing™ is distro-specific. D
> From: David Herrmann
>
> On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 8:17 PM, Daniel Buch wrote:
> > Nice, I was in the process of implementing this. Looks good to me. But I
> > think it would be better to use "vi" instead of "vim" if no &editor is set.
> > Vim is not installed on every system as default but vi i
Hi
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 8:17 PM, Daniel Buch wrote:
> Nice, I was in the process of implementing this. Looks good to me. But I
> think it would be better to use "vi" instead of "vim" if no &editor is set.
> Vim is not installed on every system as default but vi is most likely.
I'd prefer doin
Nice, I was in the process of implementing this. Looks good to me. But I
think it would be better to use "vi" instead of "vim" if no &editor is set.
Vim is not installed on every system as default but vi is most likely.
Den 11/10/2014 18.37 skrev "Ronny Chevalier" :
> It helps editing units by eit
It helps editing units by either creating a drop-in file, like
/etc/systemd/system/my.service.d/amendments.conf, or by copying the
original unit from /usr/lib/systemd/ to /etc/systemd/ if the --full
option is specified. Then it invokes the $SYSTEMD_EDITOR or $EDITOR or
vim to the related files and
23 matches
Mail list logo
