Re: TIP vs. Pico

[Martin Schulze <joey@finlandia.Infodrom.North.DE>]

Jordi wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 28, 1999 at 03:51:37PM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > Christian Surchi wrote:
> > > On 28-Dec-99 Martin Schulze wrote:
> > > 
> > > > I guess currently pine depends on pico, thus in the future it would
> > > > depend on tip | pico (in that order)
> > > 
> > > No, pine and pico comes from the same source package (pine), but no
> > > dependencies.
> > 
> > Do they create different binary packages or not?  If not, this would
> > now be recommended...
> 
> You mean to recommend tip, or recommend pico?

Neither:  Recommend tip | pico, in that order.

> From what the author says, he uses tip as the pine editor without problems.
> Hopefully someone will come with a free pine part, and along with tip, would
> provide a complete free pine package.

Maybe tip would do fine with mutt/pine-view

At least last I heard the mutt/pine interface should be usable but doesn't
provide the pine editor, well, that's tip's job now.

Regards,

	Joey

-- 
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct,
not tried it.  -- Donald E. Knuth

Please always Cc to me when replying to me on the lists.