[arch-general] Add wpa_supplicant to the Group 'Base'

Neven Sajko nsajko at gmail.com
Sun Apr 26 11:48:44 UTC 2015

On 26 April 2015 at 00:24, Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf at rocketmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Apr 2015 23:55:32 +0200, Neven Sajko wrote:
>>On 25 April 2015 at 19:36, Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf at rocketmail.com>
>>> On Sat, 25 Apr 2015 17:51:10 +0200, Neven Sajko wrote:
>>>> nano
>>> IMO nano should be part of base. Other editors might have advantages
>>> over nano, but to set up config files, it's on of the most easiest to
>>> use editors. It's my default editor, because you don't get a
>>> tendonitis and you don't need to learn billions of shortcuts and a
>>> strange language to configure the editor, IOW it's not like Emacs
>>> and it's also not like the two modes Vi/m, "beep repeatedly" and
>>> "break everything". Sure, for coders those editors have their
>>> advantages, but to set up an install nano is a good choice, because
>>> it can be used by everybody. Perhaps by default an improved nanorc
>>> should be provided.
>>I didn't use nano much but I'm pretty sure you could edit text faster
>>in MS Word,
>>so I cannot imagine any scenario in which it should be used.
>>If you don't know how to use anything better you should probably learn
> Mentioning a Windows office suite is polemic. Even a lot of us *nix
> users nowadays are using GUI editors, Sublime text, Pluma, Atom editor,
> Gvim etc. for tasks an editor usually is used for, unlikely for
> editing office work. For some tasks a GUI isn't an option, usually for
> editing simple config files something as Nano can be used by nearly
> everybody. Most of us for sure are aware how to use Vi too. I prefer to
> get Nano when e.g. running visudo, but sure, I'm able to use Vi/m too.
> I'm not an editor war guy. There's nothing wrong with Emacs and Vi/m,
> but there's also nothing wrong with easy to use, self explaining
> editors such as Nano, mcedit etc., even while Vi is a standard.
> Why not providing an easy to use self explaining editor such as Nano?
> You don't benefit from a "better" editor for this task. Why should
> people learn how to use oldish editors, they never need for simple
> tasks, when we nowadays have much easier, self-explaining editors,
> such as nano?
> Do you seriously consider
> $ pacman -Qi nano | grep Size
> Installed Size :   2.05 MiB
> in base as an issue? 2.05 MiB that make live for many users much easier.
> Regards,
> Ralf

Having nano installed wouldn't bother me much, but I think that if it
prevents people from using faster editors it is probably not beneficial.

More information about the arch-general mailing list