GNU Nano Gets New Stable Release

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

GNU Nano Gets New Stable Release

Posted by Soulskill on Tuesday March 24, 2015 @01:01PM from the onward-and-upward dept.

jones_supa writes: GNU Nano 2.4.0 has been released as the first stable update to this UNIX command line text editor in a number of years. The release codenamed "Lizf" brings a wide variety of changes: full undo system, Vim-compatible file locking, linter support, formatter support, flexible syntax highlighting, and random bugfixes.

119 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Fisrt Nanu by goombah99 · 2015-03-24 13:02 · Score: 0, Troll

Nanu Nanu. Shazbat!

--
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Random bugfixes, good by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-24 13:04 · Score: 5, Funny

I always prefer random fixes instead of carefully planned specific fixes.
1. Re:Random bugfixes, good by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-24 13:14 · Score: 0
  
  Considering the software is named Guano, I'm guessing the code is pretty crappy.
2. Re:Random bugfixes, good by houstonbofh · 2015-03-25 04:41 · Score: 1
  
  Considering the software is named Guano, I'm guessing the code is pretty crappy.
  And this is what happens when you guess instead of learn. Especially with incorrect information. Nano is my favorite Unix text editor.
3. Re:Random bugfixes, good by JackieBrown · 2015-03-25 05:04 · Score: 2
  
  Mine too. Very easy to use with almost all the commands you need printed on the bottom of the editor
4. Re:Random bugfixes, good by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-26 11:34 · Score: 0
  
  I hate it, because it isn't vim.
Nano is not a command line editor by ShanghaiBill · 2015-03-24 13:27 · Score: 4, Insightful

Nano is a full screen text editor.
Ed is a command line editor.
Have Slashdot editors never used a teletype?
1. Re:Nano is not a command line editor by smittyoneeach · 2015-03-24 13:43 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Yeah, it's an editor invoked at the command line in a terminal, i.e. not a graphical mode editor.
  
  --
  Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
2. Re:Nano is not a command line editor by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-24 14:54 · Score: 0
  
  Also, since the person who posted this was too stupid to be able to actually link to the nano web site, here it is.
3. Re:Nano is not a command line editor by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-24 14:56 · Score: 0
  
  Wrong. I just double clicked "nano.exe" and it opened in a window.
4. Re:Nano is not a command line editor by kindbud · 2015-03-24 16:50 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  ed is a line editor.
  readline is a command line editor.
  
  --
  Edith Keeler Must Die
5. Re:Nano is not a command line editor by Trogre · 2015-03-24 18:53 · Score: 1
  
  I invoke most graphical programs at the command line in a terminal.
  Doesn't make them command line programs.
  
  --
  "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
6. Re:Nano is not a command line editor by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-24 19:26 · Score: 0
  
  Ed is a command line editor.
  Heathen. Ed is the standard text editor.
7. Re:Nano is not a command line editor by smittyoneeach · 2015-03-24 21:32 · Score: 1
  
  So, maybe "nano.exe" is not "nano"?
  
  --
  Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
8. Re:Nano is not a command line editor by smittyoneeach · 2015-03-24 21:34 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not disputing your point. Emacs, for example can word against the character output stream in the terminal, or against X11.
  
  --
  Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
9. Re:Nano is not a command line editor by Misagon · 2015-03-24 23:24 · Score: 2
  
  .. and I use to invoke nano in a terminal window by double-clicking an icon in the sidebar on my desktop.
  
  --
  "We mustn't be caught by surprise by our own advancing technology" -- Aldous Huxley
10. Re:Nano is not a command line editor by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-24 23:27 · Score: 0
  
  "It's not graphical, therefore it's command-line"?
  It's not graphical, but it's not command-line either. It's screen-oriented and keypress-driven; command-line would be command-driven and line-oriented.
  No-one would have called Turbo Pascal "command line", so I don't see why people insist on calling ncurses programs that.
  In terms of what a program can actually DO for you, there's much difference between CLI and TUI, and barely any difference at all between TUI and GUI. You can pipe or heredoc into ed. True stdin/stdout programs like this are usually closer to being tools than applications, which for me is the ideal.
  The real Unix (meaning the one actually used by Ken and Dennis, meaning Research Unix) strongly favoured these Unixy types of tools over forced-interaction, TUI-type applications. and once proper graphics were invented, ditched curses in favour of GUI for the handful of things where having two dimensions actually does make sense. I have the 10th edition manual and it seems only two curses programs remained by then - vi and dired - and vi wasn't even the preferred editor for most people on that system.
11. Re:Nano is not a command line editor by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-24 23:43 · Score: 0
  
  If I was teaching Unix, I'd start them out with ed as the editor, yes. I didn't understand vi until after I used ed. Before that, I was only using vi in about the same way you'd use nano or mcedit, and didn't understand why it was regarded as better.
  And I wouldn't want to be standing there, telling a bunch of beginners how great pipes are, and then show them an editor that you can't pipe or heredoc into. I'd also teach mail(1) as the standard way to send a mail, whether interactively or from a shell script or from a program.
  The addr1,addr2 command is also a pretty good example of orthogonality.
  If old-style Unix isn't a great pedagogical operating system, I don't know what is.
  And now Linux people are removing ed from distributions. People. can not. think. logically. at all.
12. Re:Nano is not a command line editor by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-25 00:55 · Score: 0
  
  Wrong. I just double clicked "nano.exe" and it opened in a window.
  It opened a cmd Window. It is not a graphical UI.
13. Re:Nano is not a command line editor by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-25 02:24 · Score: 0
  
  Then go back to using a teletype and stop bugging us with archaic terms nobody gives the slightest shit about (except for you, obviously).
14. Re:Nano is not a command line editor by houstonbofh · 2015-03-25 04:45 · Score: 1
  
  But how will the Ubuntu users know which Debian version to use? :)
15. Re:Nano is not a command line editor by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-25 05:49 · Score: 0
  
  Actually, even ignoring the fact that typewriters ever existed, it makes sense to distinguish between CLI and TUI.
  People seem to think it's important to distinguish between TUI and GUI, so it must make sense to distinguish between CLI and TUI, because the difference between CLI and TUI, in terms of what the program can do for you, is much bigger than the difference between TUI and GUI.
  Any stdin/stdout program, you can call from a script, run it conditionally, pipe or heredoc into it, etc. You can pipe into ed, from diff -e say.
  To me, seeing the value of ed is a sign that someone actually understands what's good about Unix.
  I've sent myself automated messages using mail(1), whereas mutt(1) is about equal to webmail in terms of how you can use it -- it's this whole paradigm of forced interaction. So we can see that command-line and ncurses are completely, categorically different things.
16. Re:Nano is not a command line editor by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-25 06:08 · Score: 0
  
  I wouldn't consider something like ed as a real text editor (I know, bring out the pitchforks), but rather more of a text manipulator. They really serve different purposes.
  Except at one time, all we had was something like ed, so it was a text editor. Now we have so much better options, but they've lost the functionality that the pure command-line 'editors' had.
  There's room for both. But the teletypes can still GTFO.
17. Re:Nano is not a command line editor by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-25 07:10 · Score: 0
  
  Sure, "console" or "terminal" text editor would have been more accurate, but you're being more than a little pedantic.
18. Re:Nano is not a command line editor by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-25 15:22 · Score: 0
  
  It opened a graphical window in a graphical UI.
19. Re:Nano is not a command line editor by cthulhu11 · 2015-03-26 07:47 · Score: 1
  
  thank you, beat me to this.
This is a great excuse by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-24 13:48 · Score: 0

to comb the Cheetoh crumbs out of your neckbeard.
1. Re:This is a great excuse by ArchieBunker · 2015-03-24 14:00 · Score: 2
  
  Are you kidding? No self respecting neckbeard would be caught dead using Nano. It's too simple and straightforward for them. Their editor needs to have an interactive and non interactive mode and no use of the delete or backspace key. I mean keyboards have had that function for like a half century now...
  
  --
  Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
2. Re:This is a great excuse by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-24 14:23 · Score: 0
  
  Vim has support for backspace and I believe it is usually turned on by default. ctrl-h is bettter though.
  Also, nano is a bad text editor because it is awkwardly straddling the realms of "user friendly" and "expert friendly." Anyone who is going to bother learning a text editor will learn a better one. People who don't want to bother will just use eclipse or whatever.
3. Re:This is a great excuse by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-24 14:25 · Score: 0
  
  What?
  Vim has support for the delete and backspace key.
  Or are you talking about emacs or something?
4. Re:This is a great excuse by mcrbids · 2015-03-24 14:39 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  I'm a *nix neckbeard, I respect my skills, and I use nano daily. It's a simple, fast, straightforward editor with controls similar to Word Star. Ctl-K to delete line, etc. As I've been busy building my neckbeard for 15 years or so now, and originally learned word processing with WordStar, it's a simple, natural fit.
  I code in NetBeans with an IDE but for sysadmin work on any of the 50 or so servers I admin? Nano + mercurial all the way.
  
  --
  I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
5. Re:This is a great excuse by EmeraldBot · 2015-03-24 14:41 · Score: 1
  
  Are you kidding? No self respecting neckbeard would be caught dead using Nano. It's too simple and straightforward for them. Their editor needs to have an interactive and non interactive mode and no use of the delete or backspace key. I mean keyboards have had that function for like a half century now...
  Yeah, no one but those mythical "neckbeards" could ever possibly want such advanced features as... being able to customize it. Or auto completion. Or hell, even code folding. I mean, Nano's biggest boast it that they have syntax highlighting and find-and-replace. Some people need a bit more from their editor then that. Oh, and VI does support the backspace key. In fact, it has for about 20+ years now.
  
  --
  "Set a man a fire, he'll be warm for the rest of the night. Set a man afire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
6. Re: This is a great excuse by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-24 15:40 · Score: 0
  
  vi a link to vim ?
  I haven't used plain old vi in a long time.
7. Re: This is a great excuse by EmeraldBot · 2015-03-24 17:08 · Score: 2
  
  vi a link to vim ? I haven't used plain old vi in a long time.
  The operating system I use actually does ship with an implementation of a very old version of vi. I don't use it (I use vim), but I do know for a fact that it supports the backspace key, along with a bunch of stuff nano doesn't.
  Clarification: I don't have a problem at all with nano, but I do with people who say it's stupid that I want more from a text editor than search-and-replace. Also, binding all those shortcuts to the control key has got to wear on your pinky after a while...
  
  --
  "Set a man a fire, he'll be warm for the rest of the night. Set a man afire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
8. Re:This is a great excuse by OrangeTide · 2015-03-24 17:34 · Score: 2
  
  I'm a *nix neckbeard...
  Well, I'm not a true neckbeard, but merely a unix beard. But I question anyone's commitment to the Unix way if they are not using Traditional Vi. But I'm rather torn on the issue of facial hair and operating systems because a man I deeply respect has no beard at all!
  
  --
  “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
9. Re:This is a great excuse by righteousness · 2015-03-24 21:15 · Score: 3
  
  I use nano because for me it is the best text-mode "text editor". I use it to "edit text". Not for coding, which I guess is what you're talking about. For just "editing text", nano is the most user-friendly. There's no need for all those advanced features you mention when all I want to do is "edit text files". I'm talking about plain "text files", the kind that just have words and punctuation and none of the code tags or whatever that needs to be syntax highlighted. Just normal words in English or other language and none of the programming words that need to be auto-completed. You know what I mean?
  
  --
  Don't fornicate. Seriously, just don't do it.
10. Re:This is a great excuse by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-24 23:30 · Score: 0
  
  Vim has support for backspace and I believe it is usually turned on by default. ctrl-h is bettter though.
  Also, nano is a bad text editor because it is awkwardly straddling the realms of "user friendly" and "expert friendly." Anyone who is going to bother learning a text editor will learn a better one. People who don't want to bother will just use eclipse or whatever.
  Totally untrue. "Eclipse or whatever" doesn't work in a terminal window, but nano does. Nano is also supported in almost all Linux distros out of the box, even ultra slim embedded, so using it on unfamiliar systems really speeds things up.
11. Re:This is a great excuse by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-24 23:38 · Score: 0
  
  I'm a *nix neckbeard, I respect my skills, and I use nano daily. It's a simple, fast, straightforward editor with controls similar to Word Star. Ctl-K to delete line, etc. As I've been busy building my neckbeard for 15 years or so now, and originally learned word processing with WordStar, it's a simple, natural fit.
  I code in NetBeans with an IDE but for sysadmin work on any of the 50 or so servers I admin? Nano + mercurial all the way.
  Yes. Ctrl-k to delete a line. That's it exactly.
12. Re:This is a great excuse by fisted · 2015-03-25 00:22 · Score: 2
  
  I suppose that's why you only manage 50-or-so servers
  
  --
  CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
13. Re:This is a great excuse by jeremyp · 2015-03-25 00:42 · Score: 1
  
  I certainly wouldn't be caught using nano, not since our sys admin accidentally trashed a Linux system by editing the pam config file with nano. After he saved the file, nobody could log in anymore because nano inserted a line feed where a long line had wrapped in his terminal.
  We got the system back by booting from a live CD and using vi to join the broken line back together.
  
  --
  All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
14. Re:This is a great excuse by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-25 02:27 · Score: 0
  
  Yeah, who are these casuals who prefer practicality over principals! BURN THEM!
15. Re: This is a great excuse by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-25 02:31 · Score: 0
  
  Much like you probably haven't used a manual typewriter for a long time. The only reason to use either is pure nostalgia.
16. Re: This is a great excuse by tsqr · 2015-03-25 02:54 · Score: 1
  
  Much like you probably haven't used a manual typewriter for a long time. The only reason to use either is pure nostalgia.
  Unless you need to cut a mimeograph stencil. Which would be either nostalgia or for love of the smell of mimeo ink.
17. Re:This is a great excuse by pnutjam · 2015-03-25 04:10 · Score: 1
  
  I like nano because the screen has all the commands you need right at the bottom. It's my go to editor. I don't have to flip back and forth between a help screen and a working screen (and an reading screen) like vi.
  
  --
  Cheap storage VM.
18. Re:This is a great excuse by houstonbofh · 2015-03-25 04:50 · Score: 1
  
  Nano is also supported in almost all Linux distros out of the box, even ultra slim embedded, so using it on unfamiliar systems really speeds things up.
  Not just Linux. It is available on every Unix I have seen from HP-UX to AIX to the BSDs.
19. Re:This is a great excuse by OrangeTide · 2015-03-25 04:55 · Score: 1
  
  "Eclipse or whatever" doesn't work in a terminal window, but nano does.
  Matches work in places electric lights do not, so we should all switch to matches.
  
  Anyone who is going to bother learning a text editor will learn a better one.
  I didn't realize there was much to learn, can't people figure out how to use more than one text editor? We are talking about programmers and sysadmins aren't we, they're supposed to be experts in these matters.
  
  --
  “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
20. Re:This is a great excuse by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-25 04:58 · Score: 0
  
  I hope this is sarcastic.
21. Re:This is a great excuse by OrangeTide · 2015-03-25 04:59 · Score: 1
  
  I usually test a few logins before logging out so I can revert any typos or whatever. I do the same even when using glorious Vi. Pity that nano decided to reformat lines, I wouldn't have expected that.
  
  --
  “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
22. Re:This is a great excuse by toejam13 · 2015-03-25 05:15 · Score: 1
  
  You can disable line wrapping by starting nano with the '-w' flag.
23. Re:This is a great excuse by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-25 06:19 · Score: 0
  
  That is all well and good, but eventually somebody is going to invent vi
24. Re:This is a great excuse by ArchieBunker · 2015-03-25 12:17 · Score: 1
  
  Sounds like the fault of pam for being crippled by a linefeed.
  
  --
  Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
25. Re:This is a great excuse by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-26 11:43 · Score: 0
  
  Then you should use vim more often (because vi sucks) and memorize the damn commands. Ignorance of the commands has absolutely no bearing on a tool's superiority. And you can be very sure vim is superior, especially compared to emacs :p
The Best Console Editor by kmarple1 · 2015-03-24 13:58 · Score: 2

I'll always prefer pico/nano over vi and emacs.
1. Re:The Best Console Editor by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-24 14:19 · Score: 0
  
  You can be my wingman anytime. It just edits text! That's it! That's all I need!
2. Re:The Best Console Editor by sunderland56 · 2015-03-24 14:31 · Score: 2
  
  You can be my wingman anytime. It just edits text! That's it! That's all I need!
  Among the new features of this alternative to Vim and Emacs is a fully-functionality undo system, Vim-compatible file locking, linter support, formatter support, flexible syntax highlighting, and many bug-fixes.
3. Re:The Best Console Editor by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-24 15:00 · Score: 0
  
  I prefer Notepad++ over any of that garbage.
4. Re:The Best Console Editor by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-24 15:04 · Score: 0
  
  What is a "linter" anyway? Some sort of real-time code lint hilighting? Sounds interesting! I wonder if Vim supports that, too.
5. Re:The Best Console Editor by antdude · 2015-03-24 17:17 · Score: 1
  
  Ditto. Vi and emacs drive me crazy in trying to learn the tricks, hot keys, etc. :(
  
  --
  Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
6. Re:The Best Console Editor by iluvcapra · 2015-03-24 18:48 · Score: 2
  
  I bet you're .login just launches Midnight Commander too. Bah you people!
  
  --
  Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
7. Re:The Best Console Editor by hattig · 2015-03-24 23:23 · Score: 1
  
  Nano already supports syntax highlighting, this just makes it more flexible (presumably).
  You'll need to set up your .nanorc file to enable it.
  For example, to enable perl highlighting:
  include /usr/share/nano/perl.nanorc
8. Re:The Best Console Editor by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-24 23:42 · Score: 0
  
  Partially answering my own question:
  
  linter program [arg ...]
  For the currently defined syntax, use the given program to invoke the linter (this overrides the speller function when defined).
9. Re:The Best Console Editor by Big_Breaker · 2015-03-25 01:53 · Score: 1
  
  This - 100%. I just need to edit config files and write some simple code. I do a lot with single board ARM computers and something nice and light weight is perfect.
10. Re:The Best Console Editor by houstonbofh · 2015-03-25 04:53 · Score: 2
  
  I prefer Notepad++ over any of that garbage.
  But it's WINE dependency is a bitch...
11. Re:The Best Console Editor by OrangeTide · 2015-03-25 05:01 · Score: 1
  
  That's all I need!
  I need sed-like text manipulation integrated into my editor. I mean if there isn't already a full refactoring engine in it.
  
  --
  “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
12. Re:The Best Console Editor by OrangeTide · 2015-03-25 05:06 · Score: 1
  
  joe, ersatz emacs, microEmacs, QEmacs, ...
  Lots of choices out there for simple editors that don't need a lot of resources. But that said, emacs and vim run like a champ on my Raspberry Pi.
  
  --
  “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
13. Re:The Best Console Editor by toejam13 · 2015-03-25 05:25 · Score: 1
  
  I prefer Notepad++ over any of that garbage.
  But it's WINE dependency is a bitch...
  Geany and SciTE are similar text editors based on the Scintilla engine, but include ports to OS X, Linux, BSD and Solaris. If WINE isn't available, they're a good alternative.
14. Re:The Best Console Editor by spauldo · 2015-03-25 05:40 · Score: 1
  
  The thing about vi and emacs is while they're superior editors, they're really only helpful for people who do a lot of text editing. If you don't, you'll never build up the skill those programs require.
  I picked up vi because I had to work on Sun and HP machines that didn't have anything but vi and ed. It wasn't hard, but I did (and still do) a lot of text editing so I was able to build the muscle memory. If you need it - it's great. If you don't, pico/nano is more than adequate for most people.
  If your needs change, and you find yourself editing a lot of text, don't shy away from the more powerful editors. Once you learn one of them (really learn, not just play around for a couple hours), you'll never look back.
  
  --
  Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
15. Re:The Best Console Editor by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-25 15:29 · Score: 0
  
  Notepad++ is open source, so feel free to port it to whatever OS you want. Isn't that usually what Linux users tell Windows users when they ask for a binary for some open source piece of software?
Nice by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-24 14:18 · Score: 5, Insightful

For me, nano fulfills a vital role:
When some inexperienced Linux user has to edit some file in some form of Linux and there is no gui available, I point them to nano, because it behaves pretty closely to what they expect from a text editor (which tends to be something like notepad...sigh).
The other, most common alternatives aren't nice for newcomers. vi comes preinstalled in most *nixes, but it is just alien to your average user, and emacs - though it behaves more like what users expect - always ends confusing them because of the key chords (and it doesn't come installed in most distros, if I am not mistaken).
nano is simple enough and good enough to get the job done, and most Linuxes have it pre-installed.
So, thank you nano developers. Keep up the good work!
1. Re:Nice by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-24 17:47 · Score: 1
  
  When some inexperienced Linux user has to edit some file in some form of Linux and there is no gui available, I point them to nano, because it behaves pretty closely to what they expect from a text editor (which tends to be something like notepad...sigh).
  Now, if I only could find an entire toolchain like that.
  An entire OS that behaves the way one would expect, that would be the dream.
  But I can't say that I appreciate the new features. Sometimes I wish programmers would limit the scope of a program and say "Now it's done, there is no need to do further changes except pure bugfixes."
2. Re:Nice by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-24 19:38 · Score: 0
  
  The asperger is strong with this one.
3. Re:Nice by Gaygirlie · 2015-03-24 20:17 · Score: 1
  
  vi comes preinstalled in most *nixes, but it is just alien to your average user, and emacs - though it behaves more like what users expect - always ends confusing them because of the key chords
  I'm not even an average user and I still have no idea how to use Vi or Emacs. At least Nano does what I want.
4. Re:Nice by DrXym · 2015-03-24 23:06 · Score: 1
  
  When some inexperienced Linux user has to edit some file in some form of Linux and there is no gui available, I point them to nano, because it behaves pretty closely to what they expect from a text editor (which tends to be something like notepad...sigh).
  By which you mean it behaves in a relatively straightforward, least surprising way.
5. Re:Nice by hattig · 2015-03-24 23:26 · Score: 2
  
  And in addition has a clear help panel within the editor that helps you to learn the keyboard shortcuts as you use the tool.
  nano is great, and I've used it for many years, and before that as pico when it was part of pine (again, one of the better email clients).
6. Re:Nice by jeffmeden · 2015-03-24 23:47 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  It's easy. You just use "vi [filename]" and then inside the file you hit lower case i to actually edit it and then escape to stop editing it and then ctrl to activate the command prompt inside vi and w to write it and exclamation mark because youre sure you want to save it and then q to quit.
  And after that I have configured resolv.conf and apt.sources to the point where I can just install nano and get back to work.
7. Re:Nice by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-25 01:47 · Score: 0
  
  A Knuth fan, I take it?
  (He has famously declared TeX done, further changes are bugfixes. The version number approaches pi and has more decimals added when he updates it; when he dies he wants the then-current version immortalized as version "pi" with all remaining bugs redefined as the correct behavior. )
8. Re: Nice by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-25 02:37 · Score: 0
  
  It fulfills the role of trolling people who have to work in Linux when they'd rather be using OpenBSD or another real operating system.
  I still remember the 1990s when goatse was all the rage and people were recommending getting a CD-ROM drive in order to install a friendly text editor, aka EMACS to Debian Linux.
  There are two standard UNIX text editors and none of them needs more than two letters to do their job.
  I typed visudo, you fucktard! Not emacsudo, not picosudo, certainly not fucking nanosudo.
  If there is anyone responsible for Linux distributions out there reading, let me wish that your sphincters get to know a matrix printer in the biblical sense. Repeatedly. Thank you.
9. Re:Nice by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-25 05:08 · Score: 0
  
  I rearranged my keyboard in alphabetical order because I couldn't be bothered to learn QWERTY.
10. Re:Nice by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-25 05:18 · Score: 0
  
  "man, stick shift is hard. I just want to get places, I have an automatic."
  Which is fine, but there are tricks you can pull with vi that are just not possible with bush-league nano. Like copying 34 lines with 3 keystrokes instead of 36.
  Keep driving your automatic if all you want is to get groceries. If you want to drop to 2nd and ride the throttle all the way round that 45-degree drift in your Silvia, you'd better learn stick.
11. Re:Nice by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-25 05:30 · Score: 0
  
  Or, use a GUI.
12. Re:Nice by JackieBrown · 2015-03-25 05:41 · Score: 1
  
  I love this. You had me believing you really thought all those steps were easy until that last sentence.
13. Re:Nice by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-25 06:25 · Score: 0
  
  All those steps are exceedingly easy.
Buggy Whip by sunderland56 · 2015-03-24 14:28 · Score: 0

This is one of the problems with open source development; people will spend endless hours perfecting the buggy whip; not to mention coming up with new, competing buggy whip designs.
Whatever floats your boat, I guess; but there are countless other open source projects in real need of help.
1. Re:Buggy Whip by Antique+Geekmeister · 2015-03-24 14:51 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  The tiny editors do have their uses. They tend _not_ to require dozens of unrelated and bulky graphical packages to support them, the failure of any of which can disable the graphical editor. And they work well over poor bandwidth connections to remote servers, and even work well on overburdened, very lightweight virtualization servers for software routers or proxies.
  So making them work really well can save work time and be very appreciated by people doing critical work with very real constraints.
2. Re:Buggy Whip by Alwin+Henseler · 2015-03-24 15:48 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Even modern, GUI based systems have tools that work outside the GUI, or in a text-mode terminal of some kind.
  Maintaining such tools is just as needed as maintaining other parts of a system. Or creating new bits, for that matter. If not done, it would only be a matter of time before you'd have (badly) broken bits of software all over the place. To the point where a system becomes unusable to do real work. Text mode editors are just one of many components of modern systems (and imho, not in the "buggy whip" department anyway).
  Besides: many people use it. Among other reasons, probably because it saves them time, or does some jobs better than other editors. As long as there are enough users, that alone makes developer's time well spent.
3. Re:Buggy Whip by sunderland56 · 2015-03-24 15:53 · Score: 2
  
  The tiny editors do have their uses. They tend _not_ to require dozens of unrelated and bulky graphical packages to support them, the failure of any of which can disable the graphical editor. And they work well over poor bandwidth connections to remote servers, and even work well on overburdened, very lightweight virtualization servers for software routers or proxies.
  So making them work really well can save work time and be very appreciated by people doing critical work with very real constraints.
  Oh, absolutely. That's why vi is so useful.
4. Re:Buggy Whip by kiddygrinder · 2015-03-24 19:02 · Score: 0, Troll
  
  now now, lets not get into a buggy whip measuring contest.
  vi is fine if you've got nothing important to do but learn archaic interfaces but some of us have shit to do.
  
  --
  This is a joke. I am joking. Joke joke joke.
5. Re:Buggy Whip by Sique · 2015-03-24 23:45 · Score: 2
  
  When your GUI doesn't come up correctly, what do you do? In Windows, it's reinstalling the whole OS, taking about one workday until most of the important patches are also installed, not withstanding reinstalling a lot of software. In UNIX, it's a few minutes of editing the config files, and then restarting the GUI. But how do you edit the config files? Be glad someone made a buggy whip!
  I know the buggy whip maker is some nice metaphor, but some people don't think it through.
  
  --
  .sig: Sique *sigh*
6. Re:Buggy Whip by drinkypoo · 2015-03-24 23:47 · Score: 1
  
  vi is fine if you've got nothing important to do but learn archaic interfaces but some of us have shit to do.
  but nano looks like wordstar
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
7. Re:Buggy Whip by Lotana · 2015-03-25 00:54 · Score: 1
  
  This is one of the problems with open source development; people will spend endless hours perfecting the buggy whip; not to mention coming up with new, competing buggy whip designs.
  Yeah, how DARE they spend their own time doing what they like! Don't they know that they should be productive and do what sunderland56 deems more important?!
8. Re:Buggy Whip by spauldo · 2015-03-25 05:53 · Score: 1
  
  Attitudes like this are part of why commercial UNIX got clobbered by Linux and BSD.
  Ever use an old version of Solaris without GNU utilities? Or HPUX? Or (shudder) UNIXware?
  The basic utilities would feel right at home to someone on UNIX 7. Clunky, unintuitive, lacking modern features, and bug-ridden. Some hardcore UNIX heads liked it, although I can't fathom why. Sun wised up after a while - no idea about HP. Even on Linux, you're seeing vim replace all the other vi clones like elVIs, to the complaint of practically no one.
  If you're going to spend all day wielding a buggy whip, you want one that's comfortable in your hand.
  
  --
  Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
9. Re:Buggy Whip by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-25 06:30 · Score: 0
  
  The fact that you think nano and vi (vim really) are both buggy whips, or that they are even both editors for that matter, makes it clear that you know absolutely nothing about vi/vim. Nano is a buggy whip; agreed. Let's not confuse it with real IDEs Like vim or emacs
I wonder when by RightwingNutjob · 2015-03-24 14:39 · Score: 5, Funny

systemd will get an integrated text editor with emacs, vi and nano emulation modes...
1. Re: I wonder when by Tsiangkun · 2015-03-24 15:45 · Score: 1
  
  Are you not paying attention ? With systemd you have your choice of hex, oct, and binary modes in grepd for making use of the journald output !
2. Re:I wonder when by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-24 16:51 · Score: 0
  
  systemd's a pretty good operating system in need of a decent init.
3. Re:I wonder when by EmeraldBot · 2015-03-24 17:14 · Score: 1
  
  systemd will get an integrated text editor with emacs, vi and nano emulation modes...
  But didn't they actually consider that a while ago? Some kind of integrated editor for service files or such?
  
  --
  "Set a man a fire, he'll be warm for the rest of the night. Set a man afire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
4. Re:I wonder when by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-24 17:50 · Score: 0
  
  Emacs already has M-Cx-systemd for systemd emulation, so this could get recursive.
5. Re:I wonder when by TangoCharlie · 2015-03-25 05:10 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not using it unless it also does EDT.
  
  --
  return 0; }
Real programmers by Antique+Geekmeister · 2015-03-24 14:47 · Score: 4, Funny

Does it have the butterfly macro for real programmers?
https://xkcd.com/378/
1. Re:Real programmers by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-24 22:43 · Score: 0
  
  Does it have the butterfly macro for real programmers?
  https://xkcd.com/378/
  Where do you think all those random bugs came from? You can't fix what ain't broke.
  What's really important is that they've used the Nano Butterfly Macro to patch Nano.
Feature Creep by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-24 14:48 · Score: 0

Exactly. Now what tool can I use as a basic text editor. There's none left!
More help needed by Blaskowicz · 2015-03-24 16:42 · Score: 3, Interesting

I would simply like if it explained how to cut and paste multiple lines of text at the same time. For that task I have to reach for the mouse (the block of text needs to fit on the screen) or use a graphical editor - that'd be pluma or leafpad, to be free of bullshit.
That was still easier in MS-DOS EDIT.
By the way : (shit, I put it in a pastebin because of the slashdot filter)
http://dpaste.com/3210G6K
It has qwerty-isms. That's perhaps one of my bigger peeves with Free software. The video games in linux are worst, they're likely to be playable with a qwerty keymap only. DOS/Windows games of the 90s at least just read the raw scan codes so the keyboard acted as if it was qwerty.
1. Re:More help needed by Trepidity · 2015-03-24 16:53 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  I would simply like if it explained how to cut and paste multiple lines of text at the same time.
  Use Alt+a to set a mark for the start of highlighting, then move your cursor to the desired end of the highlighted region. Now if you copy or cut, it'll operate on the highlighted region.
  
  --
  10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
2. Re:More help needed by dargaud · 2015-03-24 21:49 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Go on the first line, press Ctrl-K (yes the line disappears because it's actually a cut), press Ctrl-K again on all the next lines you want to copy. When done press Ctrl-U to paste back your text. Move to when you want to paste, press Ctrl-U again. Done.
  
  --
  Non-Linux Penguins ?
3. Re:More help needed by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-24 23:19 · Score: 0
  
  I love you.
  In an entirely mate type way.
  That is going to help me so much.
4. Re:More help needed by hattig · 2015-03-24 23:35 · Score: 2
  
  I don't understand how anything is easier that hitting ctrl-k for as many lines as you want to cut, and then ctrl-u to paste them all back where you want them.
5. Re:More help needed by ledow · 2015-03-25 02:08 · Score: 1
  
  Ctrl-^ does the same.
  Ctrl-^ at the start of the block, scroll down with arrow keys. Ctrl-K at the end of the block. Bam, you cut the whole block.
  Ctrl-U to paste.
6. Re:More help needed by jofas · 2015-03-25 05:28 · Score: 1
  
  d p (or P if you want pasted before cursor) This is the power of vi: navigation without thinking about the cursor's x/y position.
7. Re:More help needed by Blaskowicz · 2015-03-25 06:22 · Score: 1
  
  That is because I never tried and assumed the buffer was destroyed every time. Stupid maybe but when editing /etc/foo.conf etc. I usually only need to change a couple values, or I use ctrl-K to delete only. Pasted text comes from some terminal or from a web browser, or is often entered with cat rather than a text editor.
oh no! by bensch128 · 2015-03-24 19:10 · Score: 2

They'll have to call it Micro now!
mcedit by Dwedit · 2015-03-24 19:31 · Score: 1

I still use Midnight Comannder's editor (mcedit) whenever I need to edit text in a Linux terminal. I find it a lot more user-friendly than any other terminal-mode text editor.
Vi is downright arcane. You need to hit i before you can type, and you need to hit Escape :wq to save and quit. Fortunately, it's not as bad as classic vi, where arrow keys don't exist, and you need to use ESC then hjkl, and backspace keys don't exist either, and you need to use ESC x.
Meanwhile, in mcedit land, you just hit F9, which is clearly labelled as "pull down", and menus appear. You can see what your options are, and carry out commands. This is why GUIs are awesome, it shows you the possibilities.
1. Re:mcedit by jellomizer · 2015-03-24 21:33 · Score: 2
  
  It appears crazy at first. But it was actually designed rather well as to not have your hand move from the core of the keyboard.
  As well vi was one of the first full screen editors. So a lot of terminals had inconsistent keys on the keyboard, you could only really trust the core set. The fact it was using the esc key was pushing it.
  
  --
  If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
2. Re:mcedit by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-24 23:37 · Score: 0
  
  Yep, it's out of date and hasn't adapted to the current reality of decent keyboards with ctrl/meta/super keys, and exists for die-hard old beardies to not have to relearn anything.
3. Re:mcedit by spauldo · 2015-03-25 06:09 · Score: 1
  
  Learning vi (at first) is all about building muscle memory. Once you do, it feels natural.
  My job involves converting MS Office documents into webpages. I do it all in vim. I've scripted a lot of it (and obviously I didn't write the docx2txt converter), but I still do a lot of manual editing as well. Jobs I've had in the past involved doing security audits on Sun and HP machines that didn't have anything but vi, so I started this job with the skillset I needed.
  I used to use pico (what nano is a clone of) and DOS edit before that, and I was adept at them. For my current work, I wouldn't have near the productivity in nano that I do in vi.
  Here's the key words of your post:
  whenever I need to edit text in a Linux terminal
  That's why vi is arcane to you. You don't spend hours a day editing text files. For those of us that, do, vi (or emacs, for the people that went that route) is a godsend.
  nano is great for what it is (well, pico was, I'm assuming nano is). It's an editor for people who don't edit enough text to make it worth learning a more complex editor.
  
  --
  Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
Nano is okay by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-24 21:18 · Score: 0

Nano is okay because it is the most similar common gnu/linux program to the king of all console text editors: MS-DOS Edit.
If somebody ports MS-DOS Edit to gnu/linux, productivity will go through the roof.
1. Re:Nano is okay by ledow · 2015-03-25 00:57 · Score: 1
  
  I have to say, I grew up on DOS and then moved to Linux over time.
  vi - everyone was talking about it being "equivalent" but I use it ONLY when absolutely, 100% necessary and I can't install anything else.
  emacs - can't be bothered. Literally, just no.
  pico/nano - lifesavers.
  I don't want to change contexts, do line-at-a-time editing, with arcane commands that you have to "man" to find out. Pico/nano lets you navigate with the keyboard, has all the shortcuts clearly listed below, and doesn't play games.
  Coming from anything else to use the text editing commands, people must hate them.
  The equivalent of "apt-get install nano" is one of the first commands I execute on any Linux machine, no matter how minimal and console-based or fancy and gui-based.
  When something says "edit this postfix file" or similar, I just want to run a command on it and start editing with an easy-to-find save and exit.
I want a password prompt by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-25 06:08 · Score: 0

Often these applications are used for editing configuration files. At this point it probably their primary use... If you forget to use sudo or to become root these applications will not prompt for a password usually leaving the user with several minutes of lost work or at least a temporary save to a user directory and another copy command. I would like to see these applications able to save as root or something similar.