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

Re: Vi and Emacs

"Keith O'Connell" <keith_oconnell@blueyonder.co.uk> writes:
> Your comment puzzles me though 'If your version of vi is "vim" as it
> should be'. Why should it be? I am in fact using nvi, for no other
> reason than it is the default clone that Debian installs. I want to
> be able to sit at any linux/unix terminal and at least be guaranteed
> to be able to use an editor. Why Vim? Why does Debian default to
> Nvi? What is the "realistic"lowest common denominator on machines?

Most Linux machines these days have vim; the Red Hat machine I use at
work (eew) has /bin/vi as a stripped-down vim (eew).  On the other
hand, non-Linux Un*x machines by and large won't.  I think nvi is an
excellent lightweight implementation of "standard vi"; if your goal is
"become good enough with standard tools to fix random Un*x things",
I'd try harder to learn nvi, even if it doesn't have some of the
useful features vim has.

("Why nvi as a default?"  "Because it's smaller/lighter/faster,
mostly, but also to not scare the long-hair-beard-and-suspenders Unix
weenie with syntax highlighting.")

David Maze         dmaze@debian.org      http://people.debian.org/~dmaze/
"Theoretical politics is interesting.  Politicking should be illegal."
	-- Abra Mitchell

Reply to: