| 1 |
On Sat, 9 Mar 2002 21:11:35 -0600 |
| 2 |
mrfab@×××.net wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> First, where the hell is vi? It is missing from |
| 5 |
> both the boot image and the base install. I |
| 6 |
> realize that I can emerge it, but having to use |
| 7 |
> an editor as horrible as nano, even just for the |
| 8 |
> initial config, was a bit obnoxious. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
We wanted to restrict ourselves wrt the amount of editors we crammed on |
| 11 |
the installation binary. Formerly, we used e3, which has pico, vi and |
| 12 |
emacs modes. For some reason (portability ? drobbins ?), e3 was switched |
| 13 |
out with nano. (In all fairness, e3 was a bit flaky, but being written in |
| 14 |
x86 asm, it was very small). |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
If vi was included, it would be in addition to nano, as it is a reasonable |
| 17 |
assumption that vi-ers are capable of using nano, while the reverse is |
| 18 |
not. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Kind regards, |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Karl T |
Archives