You are not logged in.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Pages: 1
#1 2010-02-09 09:34:49
- dammannj
- Member
- Registered: 2009-01-28
- Posts: 44
nvi, vi, vim
Hello,
I'd like to know about the future status of 'vi' in Arch. I have read http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/15844 and wonder if/when the 'fix' will be applied.
In addition, I am curious about the community's thoughts about nvi.
I myself don't want to use vim; I want something simple and small, so I agree that it is nice to have a 'barebone'/'the real' vi.
But I can not agree with the use of ex-vi, at least not as the only choice besides vim. It does not have some of the most basic things a modern (that is, not archaic) text editor should have, like multiple undo/redo, unlimited line length, and probably more I don't know of.
Can anyone please give arguments for keeping ex-vi as the default, besides 'symlinking something (vim or nvi to vi) is not clean'? In my opinion this is kind of doctrinaire, as having a package around no one uses (except maybe during install - and the point of an OS should not be installing, but using it) because it is not well suited for the task it was meant to fulfill, is againt KISS, isn't it?
nvi has both those features, and is still reasonably lightweight and barebone.
On a side note:
I have tried building it from AUR, which works, but the binary built doesn't. I guess there are more upstream problems with newer db versions. Has anyone succeeded in building a working nvi?
Is this the reason nvi is not used?
Offline
#2 2010-02-09 10:04:31
- Allan
- Pacman
- From: Brisbane, AU
- Registered: 2007-06-09
- Posts: 11,650
- Website
Re: nvi, vi, vim
From memory (which is confirmed by a look at SVN), the first vim replacement in the recent transition was nvi but there were issues and so ex-vi was chosen.
Offline
#3 2010-02-09 13:25:17
- Trent
- Member
- From: Baltimore, MD (US)
- Registered: 2009-04-16
- Posts: 990
Re: nvi, vi, vim
Ex has a limited line length?
Offline
#4 2010-02-09 13:36:37
- bernarcher
- Forum Fellow
- From: Germany
- Registered: 2009-02-17
- Posts: 2,281
Re: nvi, vi, vim
Ex has a limited line length?
Yes, its buffers are hardcoded. Line length is 160 (= 2 x 80) characters, if I recall right. This mirrors the usual terminal width when vi was written long, long ago.
To know or not to know ...
... the questions remain forever.
Offline
#5 2010-02-09 13:56:50
- Stefan Husmann
- Member
- From: Germany
- Registered: 2007-08-07
- Posts: 1,391
Re: nvi, vi, vim
There already is a fix for that line problem posted on the bugtracker. I do not know why it is not applied yet. It works fine for me here.
Offline
#6 2010-02-09 14:03:40
- Allan
- Pacman
- From: Brisbane, AU
- Registered: 2007-06-09
- Posts: 11,650
- Website
Re: nvi, vi, vim
It looks like that fix was just committed to [testing]. Not sure if the package has been pushed yet...
Offline
#7 2010-02-10 07:43:26
- dolby
- Member
- From: 1992
- Registered: 2006-08-08
- Posts: 1,581
Re: nvi, vi, vim
A package is in testing but the developer who built it didnt search for all bug reports relating to the application and he forgot about http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/18215
There shouldn't be any reason to learn more editor types than emacs or vi -- mg (1)
[You learn that sarcasm does not often work well in international forums. That is why we avoid it. -- ewaller (arch linux forum moderator)
Offline
#8 2010-02-10 12:09:36
- essence-of-foo
- Member
- Registered: 2008-07-12
- Posts: 84
Re: nvi, vi, vim
Maybe we should replace the standard editor in Arch with e3? It's freaking fast and small
It has emulation modes for most classic editors. So everyone should be happy.
Last edited by essence-of-foo (2010-02-10 12:41:38)
Offline
Pages: 1