Re: Link for MORE

[Earnie Boyd <earnie_boyd at yahoo dot com>]

Christopher Faylor wrote:
> 
> >>>Well, my interest begins and ends with the file creation being moved
> >>>somewhere sensible.  Simply running setup should not create
> >>>/etc/profile any more than installing sed.
> >>
> >>Yep.  Agreed.
> >>
> >I'm not sure I agree.  It doesn't matter what creates it, it needs
> >created.  Go back before DJ created the patch to setup and take a look
> >at the mail list.  It's a needed item, setup does it now.  It's a
> >living method.  It needs a modification, so just modify it.  I would;
> >but, Robert, you've it already in your sandbox and it's such a simple
> >change.
> 
> What are you not agreeing to?  No one is denying that the /etc/profile
> files themselves need to be created.
> 

I don't know that setup shouldn't be the creator of /etc/profile vs some
external package that installs it.

> If you're referring to adding an alias for 'more', then we're not
> talking about that.  

I'm talking of adding the suggestion of 
   export PAGER=less
to the current methods of creating /etc/profile.

> It's not the correct solution anyway.  Adding an
> alias in /etc/profile doesn't help tcsh users and it breaks ash usage
> without the addition of extra tests.  Which, coincidentally, brings us
> back to the issue of what should be in /etc/profile.
> 

I don't disagree with this.  It's just that I made a _simple_ suggestion
and it broke out into a long winded conversation that ends up having
little relevance to the suggestion.

Earnie.

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com