On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 01:28:54PM +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote: > Hi, > > On 25 June 2009 pm 13:03:01 Manish Jain wrote: > > > If you want to make a case for replacing ed(1), you're going > > > to have to come up with some concrete reasons for doing so, > > > not just make a (long and hyperbolic) statement that you > > > don't like it. > > > > requirements of being interactive. That's one reason. Secondly, > > how many times does an average commandline user even think of > > using ed when he needs to edit a file, even in the extreme case > > where there are no alternatives ? > > > isn't there ee in the base system?
ee is in /usr/bin, just like vi. > > Till the improvements are in place, we need the alternative of > > having vi under /bin rather than /usr/bin. > > > I do not see any reason to have a monster like vi there. I agree, but for different reasons. Though I love vi(m), I realize that not everyone does. If the point of all of this is to provide an editor which can be used by just about anyone in the event that /usr is unavailable, vi will not fit the bill any more than ex will. ee is a better start, and it's conveniently 1/5 the size of vi. > > But I guess my words are of no use when the people who matter > > just won't listen. So I give any hopes in this regard. > > I hope that they do not listen. > > It would be even better to have an editor like joe in /bin than > anything like vi. Certainly. Erik _______________________________________________ firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"