Re: bashbug's default editor

From	Chet Ramey <chet.ramey@case.edu>
Newsgroups	gnu.bash.bug
Subject	Re: bashbug's default editor
Date	2020-07-31 11:15 -0400
Organization	ITS, Case Western Reserve University
Message-ID	<mailman.388.1596208525.2739.bug-bash@gnu.org> (permalink)
References	<20200731101458.2102eada@delli.fritz.box> <4381b377-bb75-acbf-cad0-3f18f84cea11@case.edu> <b3111b6a-73da-31db-104d-0ac59ec03e2e@archlinux.org> <63cea231-0134-0c79-fa10-ec2b49a395e5@case.edu>

Show all headers | View raw

On 7/31/20 11:05 AM, Eli Schwartz wrote:
> On 7/31/20 9:24 AM, Chet Ramey wrote:
>> On 7/31/20 4:14 AM, jazz_fan@arcor.de wrote:
>>
>>> Bash Version: 5.0
>>> Patch Level: 17
>>> Release Status: release
>>>
>>> Description: bashbug doesn't use vi as default editor
>>
>> This is not a bug.
> 
> The documentation is confusing (and IMHO wrong).
> 
> "If EDITOR is not set, bashbug attempts to locate a number of
> alternative editors, including emacs, and defaults to vi."
> 
> The word "defaults" there implies that vi is the preferred autolocated
> editor, but the intention is to have it the least preferred.

I don't think it implies that. It's the default choice if there are no
other  alternatives.

-- 
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
		 ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
Chet Ramey, UTech, CWRU    chet@case.edu    http://tiswww.cwru.edu/~chet/

Back to gnu.bash.bug | Previous | Next | Find similar

Thread

Re: bashbug's default editor Chet Ramey <chet.ramey@case.edu> - 2020-07-31 11:15 -0400

csiph-web