Re: Vi and Emacs
"Keith O'Connell" <email@example.com> 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 firstname.lastname@example.org http://people.debian.org/~dmaze/
"Theoretical politics is interesting. Politicking should be illegal."
-- Abra Mitchell