You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
Hi,
after running:
pacman -R vim
i can start vi? with vim, also the help shows that its vim....wtf?
greets
Last edited by metalfan (2009-01-23 13:04:07)
Offline
If I'm correct Vim is the successor to vi, so yes to use vi you need vim, and essentially they are the same
Offline
the "vi" package also contains vim, but in a smaller version (compare the PKGBUILDs for details)
☃ Snowman ☃
Offline
its confusing, archlinux's vi package doesnt read ~/.vimrc
why not create a vi package?
Last edited by metalfan (2009-01-22 08:59:31)
Offline
I believe vi and vim are symlinked to each other
Offline
Vi is a mini version of Vim in a lot of distros, including Arch. Robmaloy is correct.
Offline
and thats all very nice, but why do i see vim printed on the screen if i start vi?
if it would be vim it would read ~/.vimrc....which it doesnt
you need to install vim for that
Offline
Here is the original news article:
http://www.archlinux.org/news/336/
Offline
and thats all very nice, but why do i see vim printed on the screen if i start vi?
if it would be vim it would read ~/.vimrc....which it doesntyou need to install vim for that
In arch vi is a minimal build of vim, and reads .virc, while vim is a "battery included" build and reads .vimrc. It shouldn't be that hard to understand.
Evil #archlinux@libera.chat channel op and general support dude.
. files on github, Screenshots, Random pics and the rest
Offline
Thx, according to #vim on freenode vi and vim are different programs. And its also not common to mix them up in any way.
If you want vi install it from the vi source or build a package. If you want vim install vim....
Why make extra effort in creating something in between?
Dont present users with a vim starting screen if theres only vi capability behind it.
Last edited by metalfan (2009-01-23 13:17:39)
Offline
I believe vi and vim are symlinked to each other
Exactly.
Last edited by falkman (2009-01-23 14:14:34)
Offline
Thx, according to #vim on freenode vi and vim are different programs. And its also not common to mix them up in any way.
If you want vi install it from the vi source or build a package. If you want vim install vim....
Why make extra effort in creating something in between?
Dont present users with a vim starting screen if theres only vi capability behind it.
Because Vi is far below Vim in terms of quality, so a minimal Vim serves its purpose much better? I don't know of any distro that distributes the original (well, original open source remake) Vi. They always either install Vim by default with a Vi symlink, or because they want to reduce dependencies for those who don't need the extra functionality, build a minimal version of Vim and call it Vi. The BSDs do, but that's about it (Nvi is the true name of the F/LOSS version of Vi). Another advantage of Vim being there's no change in the features already available if you switch from running 'vi' in Arch to 'vim'. Why use two different Vi branches when one has a much larger following, is better maintained, and can be minimal easily?
Offline
Dead Code wrote:I believe vi and vim are symlinked to each other
Exactly.
No, they are not symlinked.
Evil #archlinux@libera.chat channel op and general support dude.
. files on github, Screenshots, Random pics and the rest
Offline
Pages: 1