Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 08:24:13 +0800 From: Erich Dollansky <erich@apsara.com.sg> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Cc: Manish Jain <invalid.pointer@gmail.com>, Erik Osterholm <freebsd-lists-erik@erikosterholm.org>, bf1783@googlemail.com Subject: Re: The question of moving vi to /bin Message-ID: <200906260824.15069.erich@apsara.com.sg> In-Reply-To: <20090625203231.GA8436@barragry.com> References: <4A430505.2020909@gmail.com> <200906251328.55846.erich@apsara.com.sg> <20090625203231.GA8436@barragry.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ho, On 26 June 2009 am 04:32:31 Erik Osterholm wrote: > On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 01:28:54PM +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote: > > On 25 June 2009 pm 13:03:01 Manish Jain wrote: > > > > If you want to make a case for replacing ed(1), you're > > > > isn't there ee in the base system? > > ee is in /usr/bin, just like vi. > my mistake. To be honest, I never have had a problem with /usr since disks are large enough to have all on only one. Of course, those days, when it was two or more disks in a system and /usr died, it could have helped. > > It would be even better to have an editor like joe in /bin > > than anything like vi. > > Certainly. > Ok, then let us support joe. But isn't there emacs in the ports too? Erich > Erik PS: according to the spelling, you originate from further north than me
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200906260824.15069.erich>