[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Experiment: poll on "switching to vim-tiny for standard vi?"

On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 05:41:45PM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
> > vim-tiny depends on the 200k-ish vim-common too, so nvi seems
> > about half the total size of a vim-tiny today.
> Okay, so that's not "about the same". Stefano? If the above numbers are

If this is some kind of insinuation, ... well, I'm kind of pissed-off by
it.  I never used the expression "about the same". Joey forwarded a post
of mine containing the verbatim words:

   The installed-size of it and of vim-common are as I anticipated (776
   + 232 on i386); 

[ vim-common is now some Kb smaller, but this is not relevant here ]

In the very same post Joey correctly added:

  It's now only marginally larger than nvi

Thus, no one of the proposer speaked of something "about the same".

> correct, then the best case is a (696+200-560)==336K increase. Last I
> heard, the CD builders considered that a non-trivial amount of space. Or
> am I confusing the boot image with base?

I asked Joey, as one of the installer maintainer, and for him the size
increase is not a problem. If it is a problem for the CD builders, they
can speak in this thread. If it is not a problem for these people, why
is it a problem for you?

Stefano Zacchiroli -*- Computer Science PhD student @ Uny Bologna, Italy
zack@{cs.unibo.it,debian.org,bononia.it} -%- http://www.bononia.it/zack/
If there's any real truth it's that the entire multidimensional infinity
of the Universe is almost certainly being run by a bunch of maniacs. -!-

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: