Linux - NewbieThis Linux forum is for members that are new to Linux.
Just starting out and have a question?
If it is not in the man pages or the how-to's this is the place!
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
I started to learn how to use vi and emacs. I noticed that a lot of people use pico to edit text documents and I want to ask you what text editor is the best (emacs, vi or pico).
Originally posted by esteeven Surely Windows is best????
Not
I didn't intend to start a flame war here with my post. I'm writing this on a Windows machine. It's currently playing music that's fetched with Samba from my main Linux machine behind my back.
Vi is unfriendly but emacs is large, bloated some say, with loads of features. I'd say use emacs if you can't be bothered to learn vi, but vi is small and efficient. Don't know about pico, never used it.
I don't know how you can say emacs is user friendly. Both emacs and vi are very different from things like pico and notepad. I guess emacs has menus.
I use vi because I *hate* using meta keys. For me, continuously pressing CTRL-key combinations is slow and uncomfortable. vi is fast and if you spend a few days looking at a cheat sheet you'll pick it up quickly. Of course emacs can emulate vi keybindings.
This is a religious war. Check google groups for a few thousand opinions on the topic.
Originally posted by Bebo ...and I *hate* that vi regards entering and deleting text as something apart from one another. I'm EDITING the file, for crying out loud!
I prefer emacs myself (as does esr). As for bloat, I just fired up gvim and vim and compared memory usage with emacs, using top. Emacs (which has been running for days with several buffers open) is using about 10 MB. Gvim (freshly started, not editing anything) uses 5MB and vim uses 3MB. The differences are insignificant on my 2 year old hardware. Mozilla uses 54 MB, for comparison. Maybe it would have mattered back in '92, but not now.
Originally posted by rsheridan6 this link http://www.faqs.org/docs/artu/ch13s02.html has a good discussion by Eric S Raymond of vi and emacs, among a few other editors.
I've been reading this for days (years?) and I finally got to that part. Still in the middle, chasing one of his indirect links. As someone who has a strange fascination with DOS's EDLIN, and, thus, ed, I figured I'd pass this on for any who may not have seen it.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.