4 ms·

Speaking of SSH, I thought of vim/neovim. I frequently use neovim over SSH to company's computer for development, but the experience is horrible if the connecti

Speaking of SSH, I thought of vim/neovim. I frequently use neovim over SSH to company's computer for development, but the experience is horrible if the connection is unstable. If I remember correctly, other editors such as VSCode SSH plugin uses a local buffer for editing which is much better when the network is slightly unstable or high latency. Wondering if there is a way to do this for vim/neovim...

nousermane 5y ago
For the same snappy "local buffer" experience with ssh/vi, you can mount remote repo using sshfs, then open with vi from that local mount: sshfs user@computer.company.com:/home/repo ~/repo vi ~/repo/file.py
- pca006132 5y ago
  Thanks, I've heard of this earlier. However, I use ssh as I don't want to install some development packages on my local computer, and I need language server to work (which requires the development environment to work properly). sshfs is not an option here as the problem is the development environment rather than the files.
- des429 5y ago
  'vim user@computer.company.com:/home/repo' also works afaik :-). Vim has support for this built in.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
dietr1ch 5y ago
tramp-mode does this on emacs. It's nice that it's just opening a file with only the `/ssh:user@host:` prefix, but a few things need tweaks (project tree, shell). BTW `/sudo:user@machine:` works too. It still feels like there's value in making this work simply outside of emacs so more programs can make use of the cached copies. Is there a more resilient alternative to `sshfs`?
- Jeff_Brown 5y ago
  Tramp mode is great. My only pain point with it is it operates purely in serial.When i save a buffer i have to wait for it to complete on the remote server before I can switch to another. It's almost enough for me to want to open a separate emacs instance for each remote file I'm editing. (Which in tmux might even be feasible ... hmm ...)
memco 5y ago
There's a neovim plugin in development which aims to solve this: https://github.com/chipsenkbeil/distant.nvim https://github.com/chipsenkbeil/distant.nvim.
wumpus 5y ago
mosh + {emacs,vim} work pretty well on less-than-perfect links. One thing that I might miss with a local buffer is good syntax checking support (I use "flycheck" in emacs) -- it requires the server's software, and so composing local editing with server-based syntax checking sounds pretty hard to get working well.

nousermane 5y ago

For the same snappy "local buffer" experience with ssh/vi, you can mount remote repo using sshfs, then open with vi from that local mount: sshfs user@computer.company.com:/home/repo ~/repo vi ~/repo/file.py

pca006132 5y ago
Thanks, I've heard of this earlier. However, I use ssh as I don't want to install some development packages on my local computer, and I need language server to work (which requires the development environment to work properly). sshfs is not an option here as the problem is the development environment rather than the files.
des429 5y ago
'vim user@computer.company.com:/home/repo' also works afaik :-). Vim has support for this built in.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

dietr1ch 5y ago

tramp-mode does this on emacs. It's nice that it's just opening a file with only the `/ssh:user@host:` prefix, but a few things need tweaks (project tree, shell). BTW `/sudo:user@machine:` works too. It still feels like there's value in making this work simply outside of emacs so more programs can make use of the cached copies. Is there a more resilient alternative to `sshfs`?

Jeff_Brown 5y ago
Tramp mode is great. My only pain point with it is it operates purely in serial.When i save a buffer i have to wait for it to complete on the remote server before I can switch to another. It's almost enough for me to want to open a separate emacs instance for each remote file I'm editing. (Which in tmux might even be feasible ... hmm ...)

memco 5y ago

There's a neovim plugin in development which aims to solve this: https://github.com/chipsenkbeil/distant.nvim https://github.com/chipsenkbeil/distant.nvim.

wumpus 5y ago

mosh + {emacs,vim} work pretty well on less-than-perfect links. One thing that I might miss with a local buffer is good syntax checking support (I use "flycheck" in emacs) -- it requires the server's software, and so composing local editing with server-based syntax checking sounds pretty hard to get working well.