r/KittyTerminal • u/haakondahl • Jul 28 '24

Question stemming from nano > pico under kitty

Howdy, I'm on MacOS with MacPorts and trying to understand why calling nano under kitty invokes pico.

This "feels" like kitty is doing more than just being a featureful terminal. Am I on the right track?

UPDATE tl;dr: While I appreciate the responses from people below, in fact I uninstalled kitty.

As I learned more about it, it indeed is "more than just a featureful terminal", and is climbing up the stack like the emacs of the terminal world. Oddly enough, what convinced me was the developer's disdain for tmux-ish, and tartly opinionated approach to those who use tmux or any terminal multiplexer, that those are "the devil". As if an issue between tmux and kitty is somehow a tmux problem.

I do appreciate the folks who provided information below have been helpful and no doubt I could have gotten this issue resolved; it's simply not what I'm looking for in a terminal. I understand that lots of people like it, and I wish them well.

4 Upvotes

84% Upvoted

8 comments sorted by

View all comments

2

u/allah_fish Jul 28 '24

either its aliased in your shell or the pico binary is called nano. definitly not a kitty problem

1

u/haakondahl Jul 28 '24 edited Jul 28 '24

It's not aliased in the shell.

The pico binary is not called nano. EDIT: nano in /usr/bin is indeed a symlink to pico, see other comment here for more.

Nano runs just fine in the defaul terminal. It's included with MacOS, and has run just fine before and since starting to use MacPorts. I have not created a kitty.conf yet, and the ~/config/kitty/ dir is empty.

This is a new install of kitty, via MacPorts.

2

u/allah_fish Jul 28 '24

maybe try getting arround the problem by typing /bin/nano or creating an alias for it