Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy@×××××.net>
To: gentoo-dev@g.o, Eric Jacoboni <jaco@××××××××××××.org>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] No 'real' editor in /bin ?
Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2002 10:31:35
Message-Id: 015101c255ba$7f85fa40$8204dca7@northamerica.corp.microsoft.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] No 'real' editor in /bin ? by Eric Jacoboni
1 ----- Original Message -----
2 From: "Eric Jacoboni" <jaco@××××××××××××.org>
3 To: <gentoo-dev@g.o>
4 Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 9:01 AM
5 Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] No 'real' editor in /bin ?
6
7
8 > I admit it's rather disturbing to not have vi as part of the base
9 > system. nano is perhaps ok for new Unix users but it's a mess for
10 > me. That's the first ebuild i've emerged.
11
12 Same here. And I would REALLY like to see a nicer vi than ex emulating vi.
13 I once ran across the BSD vi ported to Linux. FreeBSD (and presumably
14 NetBSD and OpenBSD) has a very nice vi, one I am very familiar with and
15 like.
16
17 Tom Veldhouse

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] No 'real' editor in /bin ? Eric Jacoboni <jaco@××××××××××××.org>
Re: [gentoo-dev] No 'real' editor in /bin ? Antti Sykari <jsykari@×××××××××××××××××××××.fi>