From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-14) on finch.gentoo.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.3 required=5.0 tests=DATE_IN_FUTURE_06_12, DMARC_NONE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RDNS_DYNAMIC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0 Received: from c3p0.bonyari.com (210-194-152-224.home.ne.jp [210.194.152.224]) by chiba.3jane.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FC4CABD7E for ; Fri, 24 May 2002 20:29:40 -0500 (CDT) Received: by c3p0.bonyari.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 36B711581E; Sat, 25 May 2002 10:20:51 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 10:20:51 +0000 From: Jack Morgan To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Why not vi? Message-ID: <20020525102051.GA23720@c3p0.bonyari.com> References: <15598.54889.128443.652824@mantis.styx.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <15598.54889.128443.652824@mantis.styx.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i Sender: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org Errors-To: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.6 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Gentoo Linux developer list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: X-Archives-Salt: a419e847-9466-4486-85cd-5fedf9e36316 X-Archives-Hash: 54a1b7ae1c592e849ae0749a4524b596 On Fri, May 24, 2002 at 08:10:17PM -0400, Eric Moncrieff wrote: > Hello Gentoo Team, > > I installed Gentoo today, and am largly very impressed by what I see. > Many of my favourite BSDisms are here, as are most of the vital System > V features. In short, great work! > > However, there's one thing I'm really unclear on. You left out any > mention of the old UNIX standard editor, vi. I've used many, many > different UNIXen over the years, and the *only* things which *always* > worked were /bin/sh and /usr/bin/vi. They were sometimes in different > places, but vi always, *always* was around somewhere. Not in Gentoo. > > When I discovered, to my surprise, that I was forced to use nano, I > immediately decided to take your Portage system for a spin, and typed > 'emerge app-editors/vi'. Vi was built from source (though I'm not > clear on which particular vi you used). However, when I tried to run > it, it segfaulted. So I was stuck with nano. > > So I tried 'emerge app-editors/vim', which built all of X for me (I > have to remember the --pretend option). This was fine, but it took a > long time, and all I wanted to do was edit my startup scripts. > > So now I've got a working vi, which I'm happy about. Of course, after > kde finishes building, I'm going to build emacs, so I won't be using > my new vi very much, but still...For all this long time, we've been > able to count on vi as the quick, omnipresent editor. But not for > Gentoo. emerge app-editor/nvi works for me. No need for all those dependencies. -- jack_morgan