3 ms·
Certainly more accessible for casual users than vi. vi users probably know how to configure their bash to change it back and will reduce the occurrences of "Th
by raxxorrax 6y ago
Certainly more accessible for casual users than vi.
vi users probably know how to configure their bash to change it back and will reduce the occurrences of "This text file is nice, but how do I get out of here?"
Nano is much less powerful, but still a really good tool. If the decision doesn't end in a dogmatic religious war, I would be disappointed though.
- rbanffy 6y agoRepeat with me: "ed is the standard editor". ;-)
- teekert 6y agoJoe for life. Kidding, joe got spoon fed to me with Slackware. But I actually like VIM. Would be nice if it could detect if it was in a dark of light terminal though (yes, some people use light terminal, I see them occasionally.)
- rbanffy 6y agoVim is my favorite sysadmin tool: it's everywhere and, for quickly changing a configuration setting, it works great. Having said that, I'm known for sometimes installing emacs and assorted debugging tools in containers and servers when I need to look into something.
- sq_ 6y agoNano definitely seems like a good choice if they're looking at it from the perspective of a less experienced user who just needs to modify a few lines in a config file. As you said, anyone who needs a more advanced editor probably knows how to get vim installed and set as default.
- thomasfedb 6y agoAs a long time Fedora user I agree that this is a good basic choice that gives beginners something intuitive and won't get in the way of anybody else who knows enough to have a preference. I can cope in vi(m) but I always install nano on a fresh Fedora install.