Previously Bdale Garbee wrote: > Why do people insist on installing 'vim' as 'vi'? It isn't vi, and > while I'm sure it's a perfectly reasonable editor, I've found if > fairly disconcerting when I've stumbled onto a system where vim was > masquerading as vi. Why not just install it as 'vim', use it as > 'vim', and be happy?
Because vim is a perfectly normal vi if you invoke it as vi and use a standard configuration such as the Debian package tries to use. If it's not vi compatible in any way that is a bug and I would like to know about it. Wichert. -- _________________________________________________________________ /[EMAIL PROTECTED] This space intentionally left occupied \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |