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

Re: RFC: Replacing vim-tiny with nano in essential packages

On Mar 16, Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org> wrote:

> `busybox vi` is rather limited, but is reasonable as an editor of last
> resort; busybox is smaller than either nano or vim-tiny; full systems
Agreed: this is a very good idea since I really think that every default 
install must provide something enough vi-compatible.
A simple solution could be to have busybox provide vi as a very low 
priority alternative.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: