XJed is a superset of jed
Rafael Laboissiere <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Mon, 27 Jun 2005 13:13:05 +0200
* G. Milde <email@example.com> [2005-06-27 09:43]:
> On 23.06.05, Rafael Laboissiere wrote:
> > * G. Milde <firstname.lastname@example.org> [2005-06-23 11:48]:
> > If we implement the alternatives scheme that I proposed, then there is no
> > need for adding /usr/bin/xjed to the 'editor' alternatives, I think.
> IMHO, this are distinct problems.
> The proposed scheme provides an "jed emulation" with xjed. The `editor'
> alternative could suggest both, jed (emulated or real does not matter
> here) and xjed alongside emacs, xemacs, nano, ...
> editor -> jed would always use a terminal or terminal emulation
> editor -> xjed would open xjed in its own window (supporting a better
> drag and drop + additional keybindings) if X is running.
My wording above was not clear. Let me try again :
If the executable /usr/bin/jed is under the alternatives scheme control,
then the system administrator can choose /usr/bin/jed to be either the
console (/usr/bin/jed.real) or the X version (/usr/bin/jed.xjed).
Once this alternative is set, then the system administrator needs only to
add the alternative /usr/bin/jed (which is an alternative itself) to
/usr/bin/editor. There is no need to add /usr/bin/xjed to the
Is it clear now?