Date: 02 Oct 2001 11:23:23 -0700 From: swear@blarg.net (Gary W. Swearingen) To: j mckitrick <jcm@FreeBSD-uk.eu.org> Cc: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: code density vs readability Message-ID: <dxitdxlx44.tdx@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <20011002142257.C98079@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> References: <20010927141333.A44288@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> <p05100334b7d8e6544d17@[194.78.144.27]> <20011002133112.B98079@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> <20011002135226.A33832@jake.akitanet.co.uk> <20011002142257.C98079@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
j mckitrick <jcm@FreeBSD-uk.eu.org> writes: > I finally took several people's advice. I didn't give up VI, but emacs > is amazing for big, complicated jobs. I've been using only Emacs (actually mostly XEmacs and some small Emacs clones like Jed) for a long time, but recently decided it would be better to try to force myself to use vi for editing as root. (I learned it 20 years ago and liked the two-mode concept, but I've forgotten all but the very basics.) I got to worrying about the amount of Emacs code there is and to suspect that much of it changes often and is seen by only a few eyes and am thinking it will be safer from a security standpoint to run vi. Is that overly paranoid? Do other people have this concern? Do many people run XEmacs or Emacs as root on a regular basis? Does vim have a lot of similarly suspectable code in it too? (I say this as someone who just installed as root a bunch of ports from all over the world which ran their install (I hope) scripts as root.) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?dxitdxlx44.tdx>