carlson@styx.UUCP (John Carlson) (12/19/86)
() Time for a change! I am always losing my work with ex/vi when the system goes down in the middle of an edit session. Later, I type vi -r filename to restore the file. Then I make changes a few changes, or if I just want to save it, I type :x (ex) or ZZ (vi) Guess what happens? That's right, all of my changes are lost! How about setting the 'modified' flag whenever a restore is done? John Carlson
ron@vsedev.VSE.COM (Ron Flax) (12/20/86)
In article <21107@styx.UUCP> carlson@styx.UUCP (John Carlson) writes:
I am always losing my work with ex/vi when the system goes down in the
middle of an edit session. Later, I type
vi -r filename
to restore the file. Then I make changes a few changes, or if I just
want to save it, I type
ZZ (vi)
Guess what happens? That's right, all of my changes are lost! How
about setting the 'modified' flag whenever a restore is done?
Which version of vi are you running? Mine which is 3.9, of 2/9/83 does
as you suggest.
--
ron@vsedev.VSE.COM (Ron Flax)
UUCP: ..!seismo!vsedev!ron
INET: vsedev.VSE.COM!ron@seismo.CSS.GOVdce@quacky.UUCP (David Elliott) (12/20/86)
In article <305@vsedev.VSE.COM> ron@vsedev.UUCP (Ron Flax) writes: >In article <21107@styx.UUCP> carlson@styx.UUCP (John Carlson) writes: > >... > Guess what happens? That's right, all of my changes are lost! How > about setting the 'modified' flag whenever a restore is done? > >Which version of vi are you running? Mine which is 3.9, of 2/9/83 does >as you suggest. > There are two problems here: 1. The name of this newsgroup is comp.bugs.4bsd. 4.3BSD comes with ex version 3.7. If Ron is running a BSD system, how can he have 3.9, which is the version that comes with System V.3? Anyway, 4.3BSD is broken in this regard (unless someone walked on the sources again). 2. As pointed out recently in this newsgroup, the proper solution is to set the modified and not edited (really unsetting the edited) flags. If you just set the modified flag, this can happen: vi file ... system crash or phone line lost log in again continue editing save changes read mail and find out you need to recover, or just run vi -r vi -r file ZZ OOPS! You just undid your changes. By setting the 'not edited' state, you have to do a w!, which requires a little extra thought. At Tektronix, the people in Tony Birnseth's group changed vi to have a 'recovered' state. I don't know if this implied the above, but it was nice to do a :f or ^G and see '[Recovered]'. David Elliott Mips Computer Systems
guy%gorodish@Sun.COM (Guy Harris) (12/21/86)
> 1. The name of this newsgroup is comp.bugs.4bsd. 4.3BSD comes > with ex version 3.7. If Ron is running a BSD system, how can > he have 3.9, which is the version that comes with System V.3? No, it's the version that comes with System V.2, but that's neither here nor there. If you bring "curses"/"terminfo" up on a BSD system (it has plenty of #ifdefs for that, although it would require some work - for one thing, the SIGTSTP code is for 4.1BSD, assumes that signal handlers are reset when a signal occurs, and will thus go into an infinite loop if you try to suspend a "curses" program), and spend a little more time on "ex" itself, you can bring it up on a BSD system as well. *That's* how he could have 3.9. However, the point is well taken that bugs in "ex" 3.9 would properly appear in "comp.bugs.sys5", not "comp.bugs.4bsd", so bugs in "ex" appearing in "comp.bugs.4bsd" should be assume to apply to one or the other versions of "ex" 3.7 (yup, the 4.3BSD one is different from the 4.2BSD one, but they didn't change the version number).