Date: Sat, 04 Aug 2018 23:39:44 +0100 From: Chris Rees <crees@bayofrum.net> To: Eugene Grosbein <eugen@grosbein.net>, Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com> Cc: Matthias Fechner <idefix@fechner.net>, freebsd ports <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>, Rene Ladan <rene@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Delete a port Message-ID: <C8F69AB2-9B13-49DB-BCF2-9C4FAC6B0629@bayofrum.net> In-Reply-To: <5B65E982.90103@grosbein.net> References: <a48a6cd2-e088-618a-61e6-909f71ce8ba5@fechner.net> <20180804140317.GA22029@blogreen.org> <5B65B4FB.70103@grosbein.net> <30EF106C-0794-4A24-918E-FE3132F8A632@bayofrum.net> <CAF6rxgnN_DcRerExsaBhvU7LQuSDa1nDha7Li4mPL5FoCO%2BnNQ@mail.gmail.com> <5B65E982.90103@grosbein.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 4 August 2018 18:59:30 BST, Eugene Grosbein <eugen@grosbein.net> wrote: >05.08.2018 0:42, Eitan Adler wrote: > >>> Feel free to commit, but please use the absolute path to vi? >>=20 >> Why? Would't one want to respect the user's preference when it comes >> to an editor? This preference is implicit when it comes to PATH. > >This is traditional overcautiousness against user's possibly insecure >PATH having current directory that can lead to running malignant >/tmp/vi >in multiuser environment. > >Eugene To be honest, I prefer this just so it definitely works. If you choose to = set PATH to something else, so you then put a symlink to emacs... Why not j= ust set EDITOR to emacs? I'm really not that bothered. If you want to put plain vi there, go ahead.= I'm just glad you chose the correct default :) Chris --=20 Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. --=20 This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?C8F69AB2-9B13-49DB-BCF2-9C4FAC6B0629>