Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Mikko Moilanen <baldor@××××××.fi>
To: gentoo-dev@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Why not vi?
Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 05:40:43
Message-Id: 200205251242.52571.baldor@surfeu.fi
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Why not vi? by Spider
1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
2 Hash: SHA1
3
4 On Saturday 25 May 2002 03:33, Spider wrote:
5 > begin quote
6 > No, vim was dropped at one point due to the amount of dependencies it
7 > caused to build "proper" (ncurses terminfo I think it was), wether the
8 > minimalist vi were a bit harsh and user-unfriendly according to some.
9 > GNU Nano is relatively simple and fullfeatured, even for users who
10 > havent tried it before.
11
12 I like Vi too. I want to learn Vi. I was also disappointed that there was not
13 Vi. Nano is good to come too. I just dont like "nano -w" and the way it
14 handles wrappings.
15
16 If there is must to choose only one that would offcourse be Nano. But I think
17 Vi should come as an alternative editor also.
18 - --
19
20 https://baldor.ath.cx
21
22
23
24 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
25 Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
26
27 iEYEARECAAYFAjzvXJoACgkQpZOH5bT/xTIkDwCffojqnlhOdJHjo1SSir7BkrQW
28 YXUAn0eaCO7Xm/Y+tRWKWGv24BtBiTqc
29 =rK3p
30 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Why not vi? MadCoder <pierre.habouzit@×××.org>