
Emacs and Screen - twampss
http://emacsen.livejournal.com/151356.html
======
jrockway
Don't do this. Instead, start emacs. Run M-x server-start. Now to edit a file,
just say "emacsclient -t filename". You are instantly connected to your
running emacs session, in the terminal you are currently working in. You can
have an arbitrary number of these. C-x C-c closes the instance you are working
in, not every instance.

I just run "emacs --daemon" when I log in, "emacsclient -c" to get my main
emacs X frame, and then "emacsclient -t foo.bar" when I need to edit
something. (Actually, I alias "emacsclient -t" to "ec", so "ec foo.bar".)

If you don't want to install Emacs for some reason, "mg" is a much better
choice than vi or nano.

~~~
lqdshadow
Or "vim". "vi" is the editor wars' straw man. Never heard of mg.

~~~
jrockway
When people say vi, they mean vim.

~~~
iuguy
Unless they actually mean vi. Not all vi implementations are Vim, especially
those on Unices.

------
nex3
This doesn't solve one problem that sends me running to nano a lot: having
very old Emacs versions (usually 21) on the server that don't work with my
configuration.

~~~
kmt
You could always install a recent version of Emacs yourself even if you're not
an admin, can't you? Also, don't forget the options for remote editing.

------
sb
I am using the TRAMP support instead from my desktop Emacs which runs all the
time. TRAMP support within Emacs is very good, aside of the dired support all
the vc commands work on the remote machines, too.

------
kqr2
I use emacs for long haul editing, but vi for quick edits and sysadmin work.

~~~
jrockway
That's just silly. mg is much nicer.

<http://packages.debian.org/sid/mg>

~~~
davatk
According to what criteria?

~~~
jrockway
That it works more like Emacs than Vi, which is an advantage to someone who
uses Emacs "for long haul editing".

~~~
davatk
Good point, thanks for elaborating.

------
kuda
Hooray for gedit!

