From owner-freebsd-questions Tue Feb 18 09:51:46 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA18092 for questions-outgoing; Tue, 18 Feb 1997 09:51:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from cold.org (cold.org [206.81.134.103]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA18081 for ; Tue, 18 Feb 1997 09:51:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (brandon@localhost) by cold.org (8.8.5/8.8.3) with SMTP id KAA15248; Tue, 18 Feb 1997 10:51:13 -0700 (MST) Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 10:51:12 -0700 (MST) From: Brandon Gillespie To: Peter Korsten cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: root EDITOR as 'ee' in 2.2?? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-questions@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Mon, 17 Feb 1997, Peter Korsten wrote: > Brandon Gillespie shared with us: > > > > Who's bright idea was it to change the default editor for root in 2.2 to > > 'ee'? vi is standard on every unix system i've come across, if I want to > > use a different editor I set the EDITOR environment variable myself. Why > > was this change made to /root/.cshrc? > > Not everyone is familiar with vi, you know. ':wq' or 'ZZ' to save > a file, switching between edit mode and visual mode which is not > visible... If you want FreeBSD to be installable by other people > that Your Average Wizard, don't choose vi. > > So therefore, 'ee' was chosen, because that editor keeps a handy > menu with often used keystrokes. It isn't very big either, which > was another consideration. > > And what the heck, it's easily reconfigured anyway. Yeah, so leave it with the _STANDARD_ 'vi' and change the sysinstall post configuration to 'setup root environment' rather than just set root's password, and allow the editor to be selected there. This change makes 1% of the people happy and just irritated 80%+ of the other admins. -Brandon Gillespie