spelling, was: Re: please help with bind 9.1.2

[Charles Hallenbeck]

Thanks, Gena,

I understand Debian generally deprecates the use of /usr/local,
so your suggestions are well made. It is possible that the
solution might even be easier ... it is possible that the path to
the two utilities nano and ispell might even be omitted
altogether. I have not tried that though.

This script is merely what works on my system, and has not been
placed on any web site. It seemed to me to be way too simple for
publication.

Chuck

On Sun, 5 May 2002, 'Georgina' wrote:

> Hi
>
> Regretably, the script doesn't work on this woody system.  The 'which
> nano' shows that the path needs editing but this is not the only issue.
>
> Perhaps a few paths could be offered:
>
> # For xxxx users, uncomment the following line:
> #/usr/local/bin/nano -t -R -k -p -x -r65 -s "ispell -x" $1
> Debian users umconnent the line below and leave the one above commented
> out!
> /usr/bin/nano -t -R -k -p -x -r65 -s "ispell -x" $1
>
> Yesterday, I came across the path declaration statements which are
> really cool.  But perhaps a little excessive for such a script.
>
> But it would look like this!
>
> #!/bin/sh
> # Edit the following to match your system.
> # You can find the correct values by typing at a shell prompt:
> # which nano
> # and
> # which ispell
> # the correct values will be displayed
> $NANO=/usr/bin/nano
> $ISPELL=/usr/bin/ispell
> $NANO -t -R -k -p -x -r65 -s "ispell -x" $1
> $ISPELL -x $1
>
> HTH
>
> Gena
>
>
>
> Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
>
> ><smile> - I have not posted it anywhere, it is hardly worth it,
> >it is really very trivial. Here it is:
> >
> >----------
> >#!/bin/bash
> >/usr/local/bin/nano -t -R -k -p -x -r65 -s "ispell -x" $1
> >/usr/bin/ispell -x $1
> >----------
> >
> >You can call this script anything you wish - I call it "nanosp" -
> >but make sure it has execute permissions and put it on your path
> >somewhere. If you do not like nano you could substitute pico
> >instead, but you had better check the parameters to make sure
> >they are right.
> >
> >Chuck
> >
> >BTW - I wish you visually impaired students would not sit way in
> >the back all the time!
> >
> >On Sat, 4 May 2002, Janina Sajka wrote:
> >
> >> Dear Professor:
> >>
> >> Did you put the script on the blackboard? <grin>
> >>
> >> Maybe I can't see it from the back row here? <bigger grin>
> >>
> >> OK, I know you posted it some months ago, but that was a different semester
> and a different class, right?
> >>
> >> PS: Is it on the web site? I rather think it should/could be.
> >>
> >> On Sat, 4 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi gang,
> >> > I have never felt more like a retired school teacher than I have
> >> > since this thread started! <smile>
> >> >
> >> > I have found that using a spellchecker routinely makes its use a
> >> > lot more tolerable than just using it once or twice to see if it
> >> > works or not. It is a little like defragging a disk. If you only
> >> > do it once a month or once a year it takes forever. But if you
> >> > run it in an autoexec.bat file (remember those?) so it runs on
> >> > every system startup, you hardly notice it at all.
> >> >
> >> > I have configured my mail program to use an alternative editor
> >> > implicitly (i.e., always, without my asking) and instead of
> >> > specifying an actual editor, I specify a very simple script. That
> >> > script first runs the editor I want to use, and immediately
> >> > afterward, it runs the spell checker. So when I compose an email
> >> > message and his the editor's exit key I find myself in the spell
> >> > checker. I have learned to quit checking as soon as I get to any
> >> > included messages.
> >> >
> >> > In addition to satisfying my own anal retentive tendencies, the
> >> > nice thing about a well spelled message is that the voice
> >> > synthesizer behaves much much better.
> >> >
> >> > Okay everybody, class dismissed!
> >> >
> >> > Chuck
> >> >
> >> > On Sat, 4 May 2002, Ann Parsons wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Hi all,
> >> > >
> >> > > Now, old Bill, I fully admit that these isn't spelled like cheese,
> >> > > even though it sounds like it ought to be.  However, unless there's an
> >> > > extreme blooper like the poster who assured a budding concern that
> >> > > their registry personnel must be on "autopilate", I think we can
> >> > > interpret pretty well.  I do agree that folks should use spell
> >> > > checkers, but since I don't myself, at least not within email msgs, I
> >> > > can't throw any stones.  The walls of my house are made of glass.
> >> > >
> >> > > Ann P.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >--
> >Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> >The Moon is Waning Crescent (45% of Full)
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Speakup mailing list
> >Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
> >http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

-- 
Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
The Moon is Waning Crescent (37% of Full)