Where is vi?

bstaletic · 2015-04-23 00:41:19

Who needs ed, or even sed. Cat is what real men use! we can also assume coreutils will always be in [core]. There's even a related xkcd comic.

karol · 2015-04-23 00:51:19

bstaletic wrote:

Who needs ed, or even sed. Cat is what real men use! we can also assume coreutils will always be in [core]. There's even a related xkcd comic.

thiagowfx · 2015-04-23 04:28:15

I'm using vi-killer from https://seblu.net/a/seblu/x86_64/ -- it is just a symlink to vim.

mauritiusdadd · 2015-04-23 06:34:59

The first thing I do when I install Arch is to remove vi ...

$ pacman -Qi vi
error: package 'vi' was not found
$ echo $EDITOR
nano
$ echo $VISUAL
vim

... and everything just work fine. However it's not a big deal having extra 340 KiB installed by default.

PS: Btw, I vote for the suggestion proposed by WorMzy

Awebb · 2015-04-23 08:00:17

I will accept nano the day it stopps putting :wq's all over my files.

bstaletic · 2015-04-23 09:32:22

karol,
That's the one.

Awebb,
Whenever there's a talk involving nano and vi(m)? you complain about "random :wq string" in your files.

ewaller · 2015-04-23 14:06:26

Awebb wrote:

I will accept nano the day it stopps putting :wq's all over my files.

emacs has the same bug

thiagowfx · 2015-04-23 17:46:31

ewaller wrote:

emacs has the same bug

[workaround]Add (evil-mode t) to your ~/.emacs[/workaround]

[better workaround]alias emacs="vim"[/better workaround]

hahaha -- I'm joking yet I like emacs too

Trilby · 2015-04-23 17:54:16

I didn't know emacs included a text editor

Arch Linux