Linux progress?

Home Forums Multi-Edit Suggestions Linux progress?

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 45 total)
  • Author
  • #7718
    Tim Pearce

    It’s been months, not weeks since ChadW responded here.

    I think a WINE capable variant of Multi Edit is very achievable. With an add-on provided by someone elsewhere on these forums, I am able to access all the customisation dialogues.

    The only sticking point now seems to be with the search/replace dialogues. I can do a plain search, but as soon as I try to switch to another tab, it freezes and selecting a button that goes direct to the right tab seems to do the same.

    If this one function were modified, or a variant made available (maybe a ‘WINE’ add-on) to not use the tabs, or to do something that looks like tabs but is not then I could use Multi-Edit ‘for real’ on Linux.

    So how about it ? The executable does not need to change. With a few days or at most weeks of effort, you can stop people leaving to use another editor on Linux.



    Here you go. I broke up the tabbed dialogs into Individual dialogs. (I didn’t do the tabbed Bug Report dialog or the tabbed WebLair dialogs.)

    This is a little install add-on package.

    Tim Pearce

    Thank you very much for that.

    Like you said, pretty rough around the edges, but not far wrong.

    I’ve installed it and gone through each of the menu items. Along the way I made some screen shots and notes, which you can find at [url:1m1jiz4p][/url:1m1jiz4p]



    I see my .zip file contains more files than you need. Just compile Lnx.s, and ignore the other *.s files. (Delete Lnx$Print.s, Lnx$Project.s, Lnx$Search.s, I put them all in Lnx.s . And if you find them you may delete Lnx$Print.mac, Lnx$Project.mac, Lnx$Search.mac . Just have a Lnx.mac file.)

    And attached are a bunch of screenshots of the setup if you need to set it up by hand. (It didn’t occur to me that Add-On packages would be installing on a Linux OS. Good point.)


    I think the $ in the macro names is causing problems. Remove all the $. (I’ll see if I can do this tonight.) Strange, I’ve used edx$… prefix in macro names for my EDX add-on and never had a problem with that. I wonder what it is about Lnx$Search that gets translated to Lnx&_Search?

    (It’s a standard convention in VMS for system library routines to have a $ in them, with the convention that programmers never use a $ in their own routines, so there’s never a clash. I just follow that convention by habit.)

    I see I forgot to add a compile command in the Lnx.upd file to compile Lnx.s .

    John Martzouco

    Linux deals with file types differently than Windows. We’re used to associating files to applications by their extensions. In Linux, this is not the case. Linux is an OS that doesn’t include the notion of extensions.

    Is there a way to associate Linux files to ME filetypes and languages by using the contents of the first line in the file?

    An example would be to associate a Linux file with the following first line to a ME BASH filetype and language:


    This first line in the file signals the OS to execute the file’s contents using the Bash shell. The path portion of the line isn’t important to discover the file ‘type’, only the characters after the last slash.

    For now, I’m adding .bash extensions to my Linux files to use them with ME, but this isn’t a natural fit.

    Is there any mechanism that already exists or can we build something in a macro that would associate a file based on first line data? I know that ME already recognizes a file that with Linux EOL, can a trigger be added to make the association at load time?


    Looks like the macro to look at is ExtSetup in MeSys.s

    Upon entry to this macro, the file has been loaded and is in the current window. We can get the filename from the system variable file_name. We can get the first line and parse it by TOF; (go to Top Of File), s = get_line;, followed by any parsing of string s you want.

    Eventually we need to determine some sort of psuedo filename extension for the file, based on the first line of the file, and that will tell us what record in the Filename Extension Database to use.

    I’m not sure what happens throughout the rest of the program, where other places in Multi-Edit look at the filename extension. Open File is one of them.

    We’ll have to come up with a new place to save what psuedo-extension a file has in Linux.

    Perhaps we need a slightly more generic concept of Filename Extension, and new lingo. The first idea that comes to mind is File Type, but we’re already using that term to refer to the type of linebreak delimiting character(s) used in the file (PC, Mac, Unix). Too bad I don’t have my Thesaurus next to me…

    Have a look at the Cmac "WindowProperty***" commands. Search the src for "Window Property". Perhaps we could store something in here. Or maybe BufferProperty***" is a better place. Search src for "BufferProperty".

    Just some ideas.

    BTW, here’s v1.01 of the LinuxMenu installer. Fixed that spelling error that made Search not work. Added a command at the end to compile the Lnx.s code.

    On a Linux system, what do you get for ME_PATH and USER_PATH ?

    I researched how to "Shrink Volume" on a Vista computer, which is the first step to getting Linux installed. Looks like I’ll have a much better time of it if I get PerfectDkisk 8.0 .

    -David Deley

    John Martzouco

    Thanks David! A wealth of information!

    I’ll look into those routines shortly, I’m sure we can come up with a good system. ME rocks!

    David, I’m having success with and you’ll be up and running in less than an hour… guaranteed.

    If you need any help getting it set up, let me know and I’ll walk you through it. Trust me, you’re going to love DSL!


    I managed to create a 11.72 GB partition on my laptop hard drive, with the intention of installing Ubuntu. But wouldn’t you know it, Ubuntu 7.10 is NOT recommended for my HP dv9410us laptop, according to this forum post ( [url:3ulju9xc][/url:3ulju9xc] ).

    So I need suggestions for a different Linux OS to install. Maybe I’ll try SDL as John suggested, if there are no other suggestions, though with 11 GB available I don’t really need a ‘tiny’ OS.

    (BTW John I need to reply to your email but I’m not at that computer right now. That computer started having "issues" today.)


    At some point I plan to review and revise the "extension setup" processing of files and one of the things I plan to deal with it the issue you have mentioned here with *nix systems not having an extension concept. Using either the bang line to determine file type or using the last line as vi does for storing this kind of information are good candidates for inclusion into the new processing.

    John Martzouco

    @ Dan, thank you, that’s very welcome news.

    @ David,

    There are a few small, live Linux distributions you could try. DSL is my favorite from the bunch that I’ve played with… it works right away and network connectivity under VirtualPC is flawless whether you have a DHCP server or use static addressing; it’s the best product in its class and its a fine example of what an operating system could be when its built with optimization in mind. There are plenty of extension modules so you can make it do a billion different things. There is an very good book that will walk you through the OS as well, .

    I’m using DSL on two of my 300MHz laptops. When I need Windows functionality, I seamlessly remote-desktop to my XP server for a full-spectrum experience with this 10 year old hardware. On the laptops, I can play music, videos, surf the net with Firefox and run Multi-Edit under Wine { :-) }

    The other distributions that I’ve had some success with and you might want to look at are:
    – very strong community, no ‘root’ account, many extensions
    – elegant packaging, full-featured, kernel 2.6, small community

    Distributions that look interesting but I haven’t had time, energy, or resources to try:


    Tried DSL. Works easy enough. Booted right off the CD. Didn’t know what to do with it once I had it running. I’m new to Linux.

    Looked back at Ubuntu. That forum thread about not installing the latest version on HP computers has 315 posts, dating from last October to today. The more recent posts suggest skipping over Gutsy 7.10 and trying Hardy Heron Alpha 3 (8.04), which they say works quite well and stable.

    Now my question is: since this laptop has a AMD Turion 64, should I get the 64-bit PC (AMD64) desktop CD version, or the PC (Intel x86) desktop CD 32-bit version?

    PC (Intel x86) desktop CD
    For almost all PCs. This includes most machines with Intel/AMD/etc type processors and almost all computers that run Microsoft Windows, as well as newer Apple Macintosh systems based on Intel processors. Choose this if you are at all unsure.

    64-bit PC (AMD64) desktop CD
    Choose this to take full advantage of computers based on the AMD64 or EM64T architecture (e.g., Athlon64, Opteron, EM64T Xeon). If you have a non-64-bit processor made by AMD, or if you need full support for 32-bit code, use the Intel x86 images instead.

    (P.S. I hate not being able to access my email which is on the other computer. Sounds like a simple enough thing to do, but I haven’t found an email program I like that can access the email over a network. Netscape 7.2 refused when I tried it awhile ago, and i’m guessing it’s successor, SeaMonkey 1.1.7, also won’t allow it. I think Thunderbird did allow it, but I didn’t like Thunderbird and switched back after a day. I tried just having Thunderbird on the remote computer, but it was incompatible with the Netscape 7.2 format, even though they are so similar.)

    Clay Martin

    I hate not being able to access my email[/quote:f9njirhb]

    Have you tried ?


    OK, I tried Ubuntu Hardy 8.03alpha, and it hung early on in the boot process too. So I’ll cross that one off my list.

    Here’s another question:

    GNOME or KDE?

    Clay, I did try Eudora, and was disappointed that they no longer offer a purchase option, but instead as I recall they switched entirely to an adware version. Didn’t care for it. I think Microsoft has so cornered the market that hardly anyone else makes email programs. About a year ago I tried looking for a very simple email program for my mother, who isn’t computer savvy, and was having difficulty with Outlook Express (just too many buttons to choose from), but was rather disappointed at the dearth of options. I have her on Thunderbird, but was thinking maybe SeaMonkey would be less confusing for her.

    (Actually her computer isn’t working at all right now. Well, the computer works, but the wireless internet ain’t quite making the connection. I need to move the transmitter a bit, which will require a trip to the store to get some more Ethernet extension cables and couplers.)

    I wonder why Netscape 7.2 wouldn’t access my email files over the network? I’d point it to the right location, but it just wasn’t happy. (I love the way we anthropomorphize entities which don’t even count as an inanimate object.) Is there some way I can make those files on the remote computer appear to the program to be on a local disk? Maybe somehow assigning drive letters or something I’ve never done before or thought to look into?

    Clay Martin

    I have a paid version of Eudora (have been using them for about 8 years), but I thought they were going to GPL on the full version, oh well I haven’t visited the site since they made that announcement along with my last upgrade.

    Is there some way I can make those files on the remote computer appear to the program to be on a local disk? [/quote:yoptn4j7]

    If your local computer is windows, you can mount a remote directory as a disk (if the sharing (permissions) is set up correctly). In windows explorer go to My Network Places – Entire Network – Microsoft Windows Network – workgroupname – remote computer name Then pick a directory and right click on it, then select Map Network Drive. You can then select a drive letter to map it to, then you will be able to access that directory (and subs) as if it were a disk on the local machine with the selected directory as the disks root.

    If your local computer is *nix then you can mount remote volumes. I know this works if the remote volume is on another *nix flavor. The ability to do this might require that the remote volume is a particular format (I don’t think FATx would be supported) I haven’t looked into this in a long time and *nix has moved a lot toward compatibility with win. Maybe someone else is more familiar with *nix-win relations.

    (I love the way we anthropomorphize entities which don’t even count as an inanimate object.)[/quote:yoptn4j7]

    Why thats crazy talk! of course programs are entities. Haven’t you seen Tron, how can any programmer doubt that programs are entities, after all we create them. :P

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 45 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.