View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
nrl Guru
Joined: 27 Mar 2003 Posts: 446 Location: Glasgow, UK
|
Posted: Sun May 16, 2004 6:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Stormy Eyes wrote: | ratbert90 wrote: | vi isn't licensed under the gpl |
Isn't the original vi licensed under BSD? |
Yes but it hasn't always been which, I suppose, is why *BSD use nvi (IIRC). It was finally released under the BSD licence in January 2002 by Caldera, see here:
http://ex-vi.sourceforge.net/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
papal_authority Veteran
Joined: 31 Mar 2004 Posts: 1823 Location: Canada
|
Posted: Sun May 16, 2004 6:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So the points so far for including vi are:
[1] Vi is part of the international POSIX.2 (IEEE 1003.2) standard.
[2] Vi is very small, so the space taken up would be negligible.
[3] Many people like it and it's easy to move from different UNIX systems.
[4] Nano can remain the default editor so it will not affect people who prefer nano.
The points so far against vi's inclusion are:
[1] You guys are all whiners.
Answer: Fair enough
[2] Why don't they install emacs then?
Answer: Because it's not part of POSIX and it's huge.
[3] I don't mind not having vi on the CD.
Answer: Then you won't mind if it is present.
[4] This [insert Linux distro] isn't POSIX compliant and doesn't have vi.
Answer: Neither does Windows XP. It's irrelevent. Let's make Gentoo the best distro there is.
Conclusion? Vi should be on the CD. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
abzs2k Apprentice
Joined: 17 Jan 2004 Posts: 181 Location: London, UK
|
Posted: Mon May 17, 2004 6:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
georwell wrote: | Nano for newbies and that is a good default for Gentoo. But newbies should take up the task of learning vi. Simply because it is installed on every single Unix system you will ever use. |
Funny you should say that because its NOT installed by default on gentoo. First time I realized this I was shocked. I kept trying to use nano like vi but it didnt work . But thats ok because vi (or rather vim) was the second thing I emerged into my brand new gentoo system (the first was lynx) . _________________ I am never wrong. I am simply misinterpreted.
*This User Observes Netiquette Compliance* |
|
Back to top |
|
|
placeholder Advocate
Joined: 07 Feb 2004 Posts: 2500
|
Posted: Mon May 17, 2004 9:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Will you people ever stop? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
PowerFactor Veteran
Joined: 30 Jan 2003 Posts: 1693 Location: out of it
|
Posted: Mon May 17, 2004 9:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pwnz3r wrote: | Will you people ever stop? |
Why does it bother you? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
placeholder Advocate
Joined: 07 Feb 2004 Posts: 2500
|
Posted: Mon May 17, 2004 9:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Because on a scale of one to ten, the whole thing is really retarded. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
PowerFactor Veteran
Joined: 30 Jan 2003 Posts: 1693 Location: out of it
|
Posted: Mon May 17, 2004 10:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pwnz3r wrote: | Because on a scale of one to ten, the whole thing is really retarded. |
So? No one is forcing you to read the thread. Just because the subject doesn't interest you is no excuse for trolling. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Pigeon Guru
Joined: 21 Jun 2002 Posts: 307
|
Posted: Tue May 18, 2004 12:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
Honestly, if you really need foo on the liveCD, just use knoppix instead.
Because that's all the liveCD is, really- a linux distro that's booted directly from a CD. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mastergoon Apprentice
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Posts: 161 Location: Portland, OR
|
Posted: Tue May 18, 2004 12:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
gentoo 2004.0 livecd has vim on it |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Deebster Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 16 Nov 2003 Posts: 126
|
Posted: Tue May 18, 2004 3:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
mastergoon wrote: | gentoo 2004.0 livecd has vim on it |
Is emacs on there? (Just kidding).
Is it really in 2004.0? Funny if it is, because this thread was started on the 7th of May, and 2004.0 was released back on 1st March. Although, it does say "the AMD64 2004.0 live disc". |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|cJ| n00b
Joined: 27 May 2003 Posts: 37 Location: UK
|
Posted: Fri May 28, 2004 1:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i think they should include vim
i installed gentoo again a few days back and disliked using nano
using nano is so frustratingly fiddly when you are a vim user |
|
Back to top |
|
|
beastmaster Apprentice
Joined: 24 May 2004 Posts: 230
|
Posted: Sat May 29, 2004 6:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I second Gentoo having nano as default editor, simple and easy (ctrl + x for exit and save file, see it's simple), less memory drain, so is pico, also nano is implemented based on UNIX pico , so they are both good.
Gentoo definitely needs nano in the liveCD, and in the system too |
|
Back to top |
|
|
quag7 Apprentice
Joined: 12 Aug 2002 Posts: 288 Location: Marana, Arizona - USA
|
Posted: Tue Jun 01, 2004 11:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Though I understand the need to be economical on the boot CD, I really think it makes sense to include both vi and nano.
Everywhere I've ever gone in work or otherwise, experienced UNIX users have been in the habit of using vi. It really is ubiquitous. It's not that vi users can't use nano, it's that I imagine it's just irritating to have to use a different tool to do such a trivial task. I know I fly through text files quickly, and a lot of the keystrokes I hit are by habit (I am a nano user BTW). If I was forced to use another editor, even during bootstrapping, I certainly could, but I'd find it irritating.
It's sort of like, imagine if you went to use an ATM machine and all of the numbers on the keypad were backwards, counting from 9 down to to zero. Like nano, the keys are generally labeled, and you certainly could adjust to it, but it would be irritating to have to do that, especially if you had to use the ATM 10 times in a day like you might while installing Gentoo and modifying text files.
You obviously can't accomodate everyone's preferences every step of the way in a compact boot CD, but a system just feels...vulgar, without vi, even though I don't use it. I think it's a reasonable request.
I have been planning for awhile to stop using nano altogether and start using vi because of its ubiquity. There are several machines at work running a variety of different Unixes and Unix-like OSes that don't have pico (or pine), or nano, and only have vi.
Also - can someone help me out; I have a vague memory of pico not being able to handle long lines (> 255 characters) well. I can't remember the details; nor do I remember if it was also a problem in nano, but I suspect that it was. I think someone had a web page railing against pico because it had the habit of truncating long lines improperly.
I can't remember the exact details. Does anyone know what the hell I'm remembering?
It may well be the case that in editing config files you rarely ever create lines that long, but still that would seem to be at best inelegant.
I think all of the points are well taken in the sense that people who aren't used to a specific text editor would find nano the easiest (I find it easy because I've been using pico since the first time I ever went on the net, and used pine for college e-mail).
But vi is hardly a "niche" program. If there is to be one exception in terms of the boot CD and redundancy, I think including vi along with nano would be it.
As for the -w switch for nano, I'm so used to typing it that in the few instances where I don't want it, I find myself typing it by habit. It almost hurts to type nano without the -w
You could always set up an alias. _________________ http://www.dataswamp.net |
|
Back to top |
|
|
bkeating Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 22 Apr 2003 Posts: 77 Location: San Francisco, CA
|
Posted: Thu Jun 03, 2004 7:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
How hard would it be to stick vi on the CD as well so you can *gasp* choose for yourself. _________________ I breathe drum & bass. I bleed UNIX. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
beastmaster Apprentice
Joined: 24 May 2004 Posts: 230
|
Posted: Thu Jun 03, 2004 9:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I see the light bulb drama again,
https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=70970
just change every "light bulb" to "editor"
* which editor is the best editor to edit xyz ( replace xyz to your need)
* which editor brand is under what coffee licence
* editor A is superior over editor B
* the technique of making editor A or B
* which editor is blah blah
like that |
|
Back to top |
|
|
justanothergentoofanatic Guru
Joined: 29 Feb 2004 Posts: 337
|
Posted: Sun Jun 06, 2004 3:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
quag7 wrote: | Everywhere I've ever gone in work or otherwise, experienced UNIX users have been in the habit of using vi. It really is ubiquitous. |
But this represents a major opportunity for Gentoo! The ubiquity of vi means that vi-haters are left out in the cold; at present, Windows is the only operating system usable by devout, ultra-orthadox haters of modal text editing, thereby explaining its popularity.
Gentoo can establish a brand identity as the only UNIX that does not include vi. This way, millions of vi-haters will switch from Windows to Gentoo and it will quickly become the most popular operating system ever.
-Mike |
|
Back to top |
|
|
wdreinhart Guru
Joined: 11 Jun 2003 Posts: 569 Location: 4QFJ12345678
|
Posted: Sun Jun 06, 2004 6:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Aside from POSIX (which GNU/Linux ignores wherever it's convenient anyway) nobody has yet presented a technical argument for why Gentoo LiveCDs should include vi, but not emacs, ed, jed, ted, jedit, joe, jove, pico, teco, nedit and fte. I'm starting to doubt that there are any.
Nano works, and a guru who uses vi(1) can adapt to nano MUCH more easily than a n00b can adapt to vi.
(1) Outside the Linux/UNIX world, these people are generally referred to as "extreme sadomasochists" and referred to counseling programs. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
samuel.penn Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 14 Dec 2003 Posts: 114 Location: UK
|
Posted: Sat Jun 26, 2004 10:48 am Post subject: Alt-F2 |
|
|
If you want to use vi, Alt-F2, login to the non-chrooted environment and edit files from there with vi, remembering to prepend /mnt/gentoo to everything. That's what I just did and it worked fine. Alt-F1 to flip back to the chrooted environment to run commands and stuff which needs to be in that environment.
When I had enough of a system installed, "emerge vi" to get vi installed and change the default editor.
My only issue is that vi is installed into /usr/bin rather than being in /bin, which means it won't work if I don't have /usr mounted (which will be when something has gone really seriously wrong, and my small niggling issues with nano will grow out of all proportion). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
gnuageux Veteran
Joined: 17 Apr 2004 Posts: 1201
|
Posted: Sat Jul 03, 2004 7:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: | Bah! ed should be the only editor on the livecd. Anything else is just waste of diskspace |
VIM???[/quote] _________________ The realOTW: http://forums.realotw.org/index.php
Registered Linux user#364538 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
GTVincent Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 26 Oct 2002 Posts: 91 Location: Las Vegas, NV
|
Posted: Sat Jul 03, 2004 9:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Vi works on any livecd. Before I chroot into a new to be installed system I just copy /usr/bin/vi and /usr/lib/libgpm* to the target system. This way vi will work in the chroot and I don't have to use the evil nano. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
apeitheo Apprentice
Joined: 09 Jan 2004 Posts: 222
|
Posted: Sat Jul 03, 2004 9:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I agree that having vi on the cd would be nice, as I'm used to using vi, and when using nano, I'll end up writing :wq when I'm trying to exit the file But I can adapt, after all, Its only the install, and those new to Linux/vi can use nano with not much trouble. I think vi would scare people away...I know my first time using vi, went like this "wtf...how the hell do I exit this shit?" and after trying a lot of things, I just closed the terminal, and my file didn't save anyway after all that trouble...haha I don't think that there should be an argument between using vi and emacs, it's all up to what you want to use.... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ap viper Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 14 Feb 2004 Posts: 95
|
Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2004 8:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Why not have both? The reason they have nano is because it's simpler than anything else, and it does what it's supposed to do fine (edit configuration files). I don't see why they can't put Vi/m on though, it can't take that much disc space. _________________ why the heck are you reading this? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
apeitheo Apprentice
Joined: 09 Jan 2004 Posts: 222
|
Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2004 8:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ap viper wrote: | Why not have both? The reason they have nano is because it's simpler than anything else, and it does what it's supposed to do fine (edit configuration files). I don't see why they can't put Vi/m on though, it can't take that much disc space. |
It doesn't take that much disk space up. They just don't want to bring up the old flamewar between VI and Emacs, that's all I guess. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Alph n00b
Joined: 21 Jun 2004 Posts: 49
|
Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2004 6:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pigeon wrote: | Honestly, if you really need foo on the liveCD, just use knoppix instead.
Because that's all the liveCD is, really- a linux distro that's booted directly from a CD. |
I'm sorry for what I'm about to ask and the fact that it is way offtopic. I just want a clear, straight and true answer. My native language is not english so I don't really know the answer to my question. I see it all around and I still don't know what it is. I've searched the forums and I could not find the answer.
WTF is "foo"? Please... jokeable answers are not needed. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
psyqil Advocate
Joined: 26 May 2003 Posts: 2767
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|