Mail Archives: cygwin/2001/04/28/00:50:26
On Sat, Apr 28, 2001 at 12:18:10AM +0200, Andreas Eibach wrote:
>>>Pity. For "small tasks", I usually use DOS's EDIT.COM - for what else
>>>should I use?
>>
>>vi?
>
>That _is_ the alternative - but I prefer the dos-oriented editors like
>joe or pico. Somebody emailed me privately in the meantime, and we
>could get to a single point: there are two groups of users: #1 is the
>UNIX gurus/purists who have disliked windows ever since, #2 is the
>Windows guys who have a reason to use UNIX as well. The first group is
>supported - they get their vi (included). We are *forced* to use vi as
>well because it's the only editor available in the standard
>distribution - why not support also the people who prefer a
>dos-oriented editor? This explains my usage of EDIT.COM.
Give me a break. It's hard to believe that this clueless discussion is
still going on.
If someone actually wants to VOLUNTEER to provide this all-important
"joe" editor, then they should step forward. This is the typical
gimme attitude. You're using the software for free and think that
somehow gives you a right to complain when something doesn't suit
you.
You might even have a vague case if it wasn't so easy to rectify
the problem.
"joe users are a superstitious cowardly lot, they fear the thought of
learning how to contribute packages. I shall become a FAQ and strike
terror into their hearts!"
cgf
--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
- Raw text -