Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #178897 > unrolled thread

Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2017-03-16 12:40 +0100
    Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2017-03-16 13:10 +0100
      Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2017-03-16 14:30 +0100
      Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-03-16 15:00 +0100
        Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2017-03-17 10:50 +0100
          Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-03-17 12:40 +0100
            Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2017-03-17 15:30 +0100
              Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-03-17 15:50 +0100
      Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@transient.nz> - 2017-03-16 23:30 +0100
    Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2017-03-16 13:10 +0100
      Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2017-03-16 14:30 +0100
    Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-03-16 13:20 +0100
      Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2017-03-16 14:00 +0100
      Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2017-03-16 14:40 +0100
        Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-03-16 14:50 +0100
          Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? rhkramer@gmail.com - 2017-03-16 15:10 +0100
            Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? Christian Groessler <chris@groessler.org> - 2017-03-16 15:50 +0100
              Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? rhkramer@gmail.com - 2017-03-16 17:50 +0100
            Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2017-03-16 17:40 +0100
    Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? Andreas Ronnquist <mailinglists@gusnan.se> - 2017-03-16 13:30 +0100
      Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? Andreas Ronnquist <mailinglists@gusnan.se> - 2017-03-16 13:30 +0100
        Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2017-03-16 15:00 +0100
          Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? Andreas Ronnquist <mailinglists@gusnan.se> - 2017-03-16 15:30 +0100
    Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2017-03-16 13:30 +0100
      Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2017-03-16 15:10 +0100
        Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2017-03-16 19:20 +0100
    Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2017-03-16 14:00 +0100
      Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? davidson@freevolt.org - 2017-03-17 20:20 +0100
        Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? davidson@freevolt.org - 2017-03-17 20:50 +0100
    Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2017-03-16 14:40 +0100
    Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? Fred <fred@blakemfg.com> - 2017-03-16 15:20 +0100
      Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@transient.nz> - 2017-03-16 23:20 +0100
    Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? Charlie Kravetz <cjk@teamcharliesangels.com> - 2017-03-16 15:50 +0100
    Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? cbannister@slingshot.co.nz - 2017-04-01 18:00 +0200
      Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2017-04-01 18:30 +0200
        Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? Fred <fred@blakemfg.com> - 2017-04-01 21:40 +0200
          Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? Tom Browder <tom.browder@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 13:20 +0200
        Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2017-04-02 13:30 +0200
      Re: Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround? Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2017-04-01 18:50 +0200

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#178897 — Suitable text editor [NOT word processor] or workaround?

My environment is Jessie (8.6.0) with MATE desktop.
I require two things:
  1. a search and replace which can include a "newline" in new string.
  2. display/edit 2 files simultaneously *side by side*

MATE's standard editor (Pluma) can handle the first easily.

I see no way to open 2 instances of Pluma in separate windows - a la 
Notepad in WindowsXP. Pluma will only open multiple files in multiple tabs.

The two files are nearly identical and need them displayed 
simultaneously for instant visual comparison. Opening one of the files 
read only would be acceptable but not preferable.

Suggestions?
TIA

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#178900

On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 06:38:52 -0500
Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> wrote:

> My environment is Jessie (8.6.0) with MATE desktop.
> I require two things:
>   1. a search and replace which can include a "newline" in new string.
>   2. display/edit 2 files simultaneously *side by side*
> 
> MATE's standard editor (Pluma) can handle the first easily.
> 
> I see no way to open 2 instances of Pluma in separate windows - a la 
> Notepad in WindowsXP. Pluma will only open multiple files in multiple tabs.
> 
> The two files are nearly identical and need them displayed 
> simultaneously for instant visual comparison. Opening one of the files 
> read only would be acceptable but not preferable.

I just checked, and Geany can do both. [Probably lots of others can,
too, but this is what I have installed and have been using lately.]

Celejar

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178912

On 03/16/2017 07:09 AM, Celejar wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 06:38:52 -0500
> Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> wrote:
>
>> My environment is Jessie (8.6.0) with MATE desktop.
>> I require two things:
>>   1. a search and replace which can include a "newline" in new string.
>>   2. display/edit 2 files simultaneously *side by side*
>>
>> MATE's standard editor (Pluma) can handle the first easily.
>>
>> I see no way to open 2 instances of Pluma in separate windows - a la
>> Notepad in WindowsXP. Pluma will only open multiple files in multiple tabs.
>>
>> The two files are nearly identical and need them displayed
>> simultaneously for instant visual comparison. Opening one of the files
>> read only would be acceptable but not preferable.
>
> I just checked, and Geany can do both. [Probably lots of others can,
> too, but this is what I have installed and have been using lately.]
>

Turns out there is a FAQ for that
http://www.geany.org/Documentation/FAQ#QQuestions2

Out of the box it will allow multiple instances to  be launched - that 
will be adequate for me.

The FAQ indicates a plug-in is available to allow displaying multiple 
files side by side. Will investigate later. Have installed Geany and it 
will get me out of my current problem.
Thanks

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178918

On Thursday 16 March 2017 08:09:13 Celejar wrote:

> On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 06:38:52 -0500
>
> Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> wrote:
> > My environment is Jessie (8.6.0) with MATE desktop.
> > I require two things:
> >   1. a search and replace which can include a "newline" in new
> > string. 2. display/edit 2 files simultaneously *side by side*
> >
> > MATE's standard editor (Pluma) can handle the first easily.
> >
> > I see no way to open 2 instances of Pluma in separate windows - a la
> > Notepad in WindowsXP. Pluma will only open multiple files in
> > multiple tabs.
> >
> > The two files are nearly identical and need them displayed
> > simultaneously for instant visual comparison. Opening one of the
> > files read only would be acceptable but not preferable.
>
> I just checked, and Geany can do both. [Probably lots of others can,
> too, but this is what I have installed and have been using lately.]
>
> Celejar

geany has the added advantage of never trashing your file on the save.

gedit has caused me to have to start over again, 3 times, on a 600+ line 
configuration file for machine control on several occasions. As the file 
it trashed was 6 months worth of adding new features to that machines 
control, that was not appreciated. 1st time is a wtf?, 2nd time sends me 
a message, 3rd time I shut it down w/o the save and never ran it again.

geany may look like gedit,but it sure doesn't screw things up,  moving 
whole pages of code from page 23 to page 7 (and vice versa) and other 
such "helpfull" niceties like gedit does.  Purge that gedit crap and all 
its plugins from your system and save yourself from potential headaches 
that Excedrin has not yet assigned a number to.

gedit is like asking if freshly poured concrete will crack.  Wrong 
question because it will, the right question is "when", its just a 
matter of time. Life is too short for putting up with that.

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178947

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 09:54:42AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> gedit has caused me to have to start over again, 3 times, on a 600+ line 
> configuration file for machine control on several occasions. As the file 
> it trashed was 6 months worth of adding new features to that machines 
> control, that was not appreciated. 1st time is a wtf?, 2nd time sends me 
> a message, 3rd time I shut it down w/o the save and never ran it again.

Whilst this is very frustrating, one other thing it tells me is you need
to set up a backup system (although you are quite right to abandon gedit
based on your experiences)

> gedit is like asking if freshly poured concrete will crack.  Wrong 
> question because it will, the right question is "when", its just a 
> matter of time. Life is too short for putting up with that.

I like this comparison :)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178951

On Friday 17 March 2017 05:49:30 Jonathan Dowland wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 09:54:42AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > gedit has caused me to have to start over again, 3 times, on a 600+
> > line configuration file for machine control on several occasions. As
> > the file it trashed was 6 months worth of adding new features to
> > that machines control, that was not appreciated. 1st time is a wtf?,
> > 2nd time sends me a message, 3rd time I shut it down w/o the save
> > and never ran it again.
>
> Whilst this is very frustrating, one other thing it tells me is you
> need to set up a backup system (although you are quite right to
> abandon gedit based on your experiences)

I do, I am a very longtime user of amanda, since 1998 TBE. I've never 
contaminated my thinking with a windows install, going from a coco3 with 
nitros9, to amigados, to linux at RH-5.0. amanda does all 5 of these 
machines every night at about 1:20 AM and it got used all 3 times. The 
problem with that is that the status of the backup was 15 to 20 hours 
old, so I lost that days work and had to re-invent that particular batch 
of work.  I keep a rotating vtape setup of 30 days here, on a terabyte 
drive, and amanda can go back for recovery as much as 26 days if 
required. Since this is not a real tape setup where access needs to read 
the whole tape to get to the last block of data, but random access on 
rotating media, recovery's are as much as 100x faster than from tape. 
And so far its been 100% dependable, which is a heck of a lot better 
than losing 4 or 5 tapes a month, and a drive a year because I never had 
an affordable drive that didn't have to spend the thanksgiving to new 
years holidays in Oklahoma City being refurbished. Disk drives have been 
100x more dependable. That drive now has in excess of 62 thousand 
spinning hours on it, has had 25 reallocated sectors since the first 
time I looked at it with smartctl at about 5 thousand hours. It will 
die, but smartctl has so far given me enough notice that I can run up to 
Staples and get another drive and rsync to it, no data lost.

> > gedit is like asking if freshly poured concrete will crack.  Wrong
> > question because it will, the right question is "when", its just a
> > matter of time. Life is too short for putting up with that.
>
> I like this comparison :)

And yet for me, "life" is long, I'm 82 and counting.

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178956

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 07:37:11AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> I do, I am a very longtime user of amanda, since 1998 TBE.

OK - I misread your post as suggesting you had lost 6 months of work.

> And yet for me, "life" is long, I'm 82 and counting.

No point wasting any of it, no matter how much you end up getting.

-- 
Jonathan Dowland
Please do not CC me, I am subscribed to the list.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178957

On Friday 17 March 2017 10:26:05 Jonathan Dowland wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 07:37:11AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > I do, I am a very longtime user of amanda, since 1998 TBE.
>
> OK - I misread your post as suggesting you had lost 6 months of work.
>
> > And yet for me, "life" is long, I'm 82 and counting.
>
> No point wasting any of it, no matter how much you end up getting.

My point exactly. I've chased electrons to make them do useful work for  
close to 70 of those 82 years, so I can't wean me at this late stage. :)

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178938

On 17/03/17 01:09, Celejar wrote:
> I just checked, and Geany can do both.

I always use:

geany --new-instance

My ~/bin/geany is:

#!/bin/bash
exec /usr/bin/geany --new-instance "$@"

Kind regards,

-- 
Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@transient.nz>
Director
Transient Software Limited <http://transient.nz/>
New Zealand

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178901

On Thursday 16 March 2017 11:38:52 Richard Owlett wrote:
> My environment is Jessie (8.6.0) with MATE desktop.
> I require two things:
>   1. a search and replace which can include a "newline" in new string.
>   2. display/edit 2 files simultaneously *side by side*
>
> MATE's standard editor (Pluma) can handle the first easily.
>
> I see no way to open 2 instances of Pluma in separate windows - a la
> Notepad in WindowsXP. Pluma will only open multiple files in multiple tabs.
>
> The two files are nearly identical and need them displayed
> simultaneously for instant visual comparison. Opening one of the files
> read only would be acceptable but not preferable.
>
> Suggestions?
> TIA

I can't try with Pluma, because I haven't got it.  But I just tried with 
KWrite-Trinity without the slightest problem.  I can't think how to control 
the tome in which this comes out in an email, but along the lines of "Is t 
plugged in?", have you actually tried to do it?

I just managed to find a failure!  KEdit-Trinity again will open two windows 
without a problem, but Kate-Trinity appears not to do so.  I wanted to try 
GEdit, but I haven't got it and am disinclined to install half Gnome, on a 
system which is wavering, just to try this.  Sorry, Richard.

But it is obvious that some editors will do this.  You just have to find one 
you are prepared to install that does it.  Kwrite-Trinity and KEdit-Trinity 
can both do it.

Lisi

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178911

On 03/16/2017 07:09 AM, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> On Thursday 16 March 2017 11:38:52 Richard Owlett wrote:
>> My environment is Jessie (8.6.0) with MATE desktop.
>> I require two things:
>>   1. a search and replace which can include a "newline" in new string.
>>   2. display/edit 2 files simultaneously *side by side*
>>
>> MATE's standard editor (Pluma) can handle the first easily.
>>
>> I see no way to open 2 instances of Pluma in separate windows - a la
>> Notepad in WindowsXP. Pluma will only open multiple files in multiple tabs.
>>
>> The two files are nearly identical and need them displayed
>> simultaneously for instant visual comparison. Opening one of the files
>> read only would be acceptable but not preferable.
>>
>> Suggestions?
>> TIA
>
> I can't try with Pluma, because I haven't got it.  But I just tried with
> KWrite-Trinity without the slightest problem.  I can't think how to control
> the tome in which this comes out in an email, but along the lines of "Is t
> plugged in?", have you actually tried to do it?

YEPP <grin>
I was the failure which prompted my post.
Geany, as suggested, solves my current problem without adding large 
portions of another DE.


>
> I just managed to find a failure!  KEdit-Trinity again will open two windows
> without a problem, but Kate-Trinity appears not to do so.  I wanted to try
> GEdit, but I haven't got it and am disinclined to install half Gnome, on a
> system which is wavering, just to try this.  Sorry, Richard.
>
> But it is obvious that some editors will do this.  You just have to find one
> you are prepared to install that does it.  Kwrite-Trinity and KEdit-Trinity
> can both do it.
>
> Lisi
>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178903

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 06:38:52AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> My environment is Jessie (8.6.0) with MATE desktop.
> I require two things:
>  1. a search and replace which can include a "newline" in new string.
>  2. display/edit 2 files simultaneously *side by side*
> 
> MATE's standard editor (Pluma) can handle the first easily.
> 
> I see no way to open 2 instances of Pluma in separate windows - a la
> Notepad in WindowsXP. Pluma will only open multiple files in
> multiple tabs.
> 
> The two files are nearly identical and need them displayed
> simultaneously for instant visual comparison. Opening one of the
> files read only would be acceptable but not preferable.

This nearly sounds like a description of Emacs' ediff mode.

That said, Emacs is sufficiently different from the text editors
around that tackling it amounts to taking a respectable hill.

The view from up there, though, is breathtaking.

Some tricks in the rough context of system administration:

 - transparent editing of files on other hosts, given only
   one of ssh/sftp/ftp access (tramp).
 - mixed marked-up text (à la Markdown) and code snippets,
   inserting the "result" of evaluating those code snippets
   in the text (code == C, Python, Perl, shells, R, many
   more), results can be text or images, for documenting
   (up to literary programming)
 - useful exploration of lots of files. The idiom of
   "find . -type f -name *blah -exec grep foo {} +"
   from your editor, with clickable links to the found
   lines
 - hex editor, psychotherapist, towers of Hanoi ;-)

> Suggestions?

That said, it takes some investment. Some would say it's a
religion, but there are especially perverse polyreligious
folks out there: I "am" Vim *and* Emacs (take that ;-)

regards
- -- tomás
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAljKgVcACgkQBcgs9XrR2kYjkgCdGos4ETw/d/wbjamy/7/vDUjY
GtAAmgJliKRpwYucxh7iRBroqaQMlsWJ
=3e/X
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178909

tomas writes:
> That said, it takes some investment. Some would say it's a religion,
> but there are especially perverse polyreligious folks out there: I
> "am" Vim *and* Emacs (take that ;-)

You are not the only one.
-- 
John Hasler 
jhasler@newsguy.com
Elmwood, WI USA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178914

On 03/16/2017 07:13 AM, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
>
>> Suggestions?
>
> That said, it takes some investment. Some would say it's a
> religion, but there are especially perverse polyreligious
> folks out there: I "am" Vim *and* Emacs (take that ;-)
>

I'll see your "Vim *and* Emacs" and raise you TECO.
Not sure if it's available for Linux, haven't seen it in ~40 years since 
I left DEC. It could do everything but cook and clean house.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178916

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 08:33:46AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> On 03/16/2017 07:13 AM, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> >
> >>Suggestions?
> >
> >That said, it takes some investment. Some would say it's a
> >religion, but there are especially perverse polyreligious
> >folks out there: I "am" Vim *and* Emacs (take that ;-)
> >
> 
> I'll see your "Vim *and* Emacs" and raise you TECO.
> Not sure if it's available for Linux, haven't seen it in ~40 years
> since I left DEC. It could do everything but cook and clean house.

Your hunch isn't completely wrong. From Emac's wikipedia page:

    The original EMACS was written in 1976 by David A. Moon and
    Guy L. Steele, Jr. as a set of Editor MACroS for the TECO
    editor. It was inspired by the ideas of the TECO-macro editors
    TECMAC and TMACS.

    The most popular, and most ported, version of Emacs is GNU Emacs,
    which was created by Richard Stallman for the GNU Project.
    XEmacs is a variant that branched from GNU Emacs in 1991. Both
    GNU Emacs and XEmacs use Emacs Lisp and are for the most part
    compatible with each other.

Of course, when I say affectionately "Emacs" here, I'm thinking of
GNU Emacs. And it has evolved... a bit since then.

(And, BTW. you could do much worse than having Stefan around here ;-)

Try it. You'll be overwhelmed. But you'll like it, promised.

Regards
- -- tomás
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAljKl3MACgkQBcgs9XrR2kbS9wCfXLpNrgwoJVNdsJswQTfZHCYC
dSUAnRiH5m8FcHQM3KTMlwsV4ARuz6t2
=awir
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178919

On Thursday, March 16, 2017 09:47:31 AM tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:

> Your hunch isn't completely wrong. From Emac's wikipedia page:
> 
>     The original EMACS was written in 1976 by David A. Moon and
>     Guy L. Steele, Jr. as a set of Editor MACroS for the TECO
>     editor. It was inspired by the ideas of the TECO-macro editors
>     TECMAC and TMACS.
> 
>     The most popular, and most ported, version of Emacs is GNU Emacs,
>     which was created by Richard Stallman for the GNU Project.
>     XEmacs is a variant that branched from GNU Emacs in 1991. Both
>     GNU Emacs and XEmacs use Emacs Lisp and are for the most part
>     compatible with each other.

Interesting!

> Of course, when I say affectionately "Emacs" here, I'm thinking of
> GNU Emacs. And it has evolved... a bit since then.
> 
> (And, BTW. you could do much worse than having Stefan around here ;-)
> 
> Try it. You'll be overwhelmed. But you'll like it, promised.

Must be my day to write to lists...

Well, I did, and I didn't ;-)  That was on the order of 15 years ago.  
Problems that I can remember centered around fonts, font sizes, readability, 
and compatibility with my past experiences (which, by that time in my life, 
were mostly Dos / Window editors--in particular, I loved (I think the name was 
qedit--if there is a qedit now on Linux, I think it is something different than 
I remember).

And, indeed, I might be misremembering the name.  It was a shareware editor, 
and one of the few shareware programs I kept using (and paid for).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178925

On 03/16/17 15:01, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
> Well, I did, and I didn't ;-)  That was on the order of 15 years ago.
> Problems that I can remember centered around fonts, font sizes, readability,
> and compatibility with my past experiences (which, by that time in my life,
> were mostly Dos / Window editors--in particular, I loved (I think the name was
> qedit--if there is a qedit now on Linux, I think it is something different than
> I remember).
>
> And, indeed, I might be misremembering the name.  It was a shareware editor,
> and one of the few shareware programs I kept using (and paid for).


I'm remembering qedit (just "q" on the command line). It was a nice, 
clean, and fast, DOS editor.
I was using BRIEF under DOS back then for programming, but for quick 
edits I was using q.

It's successor is the "semware editor", but sadly, just for Windows.


regards,
chris

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178932

On Thursday, March 16, 2017 10:15:06 AM Christian Groessler wrote:
> On 03/16/17 15:01, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
> > Well, I did, and I didn't ;-)  That was on the order of 15 years ago.
> > Problems that I can remember centered around fonts, font sizes,
> > readability, and compatibility with my past experiences (which, by that
> > time in my life, were mostly Dos / Window editors--in particular, I
> > loved (I think the name was qedit--if there is a qedit now on Linux, I
> > think it is something different than I remember).
> > 
> > And, indeed, I might be misremembering the name.  It was a shareware
> > editor, and one of the few shareware programs I kept using (and paid
> > for).
> 
> I'm remembering qedit (just "q" on the command line). It was a nice,
> clean, and fast, DOS editor.

Chris, 

Ahh, yes, thanks--that was it!

> I was using BRIEF under DOS back then for programming, but for quick
> edits I was using q.

I encountered BRIEF, but, iirc, it was not free, and a little expensive for my 
tastes at the time.

> It's successor is the "semware editor", but sadly, just for Windows.

Well, very rarely I do touch Windows, but--well, vaguely--I think I've heard 
of semware (and /or the semware editor).  Each time I (have to) touch Windows, 
I hope it is the last ;-)

regards,
Randy Kramer

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178931

rhkramer writes (about Emacs):
> That was on the order of 15 years ago.  Problems that I can remember
> centered around fonts, font sizes, readability...

None of those would be problems now.
-- 
John Hasler 
jhasler@newsguy.com
Elmwood, WI USA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178904

On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 06:38:52 -0500,
Richard Owlett<rowlett@cloud85.net> wrote:

>My environment is Jessie (8.6.0) with MATE desktop.
>I require two things:
>  1. a search and replace which can include a "newline" in new string.
>  2. display/edit 2 files simultaneously *side by side*
>
>MATE's standard editor (Pluma) can handle the first easily.
>
>I see no way to open 2 instances of Pluma in separate windows - a la
>Notepad in WindowsXP. Pluma will only open multiple files in multiple
>tabs.
>
>The two files are nearly identical and need them displayed
>simultaneously for instant visual comparison. Opening one of the files
>read only would be acceptable but not preferable.
>

You are looking for the --new-window option, from the terminal:

pluma file1.txt &
pluma --new-window file2.txt &

-- Andreas Rönnquist
mailinglists@gusnan.se
gusnan@openmailbox.org

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web