Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 00:30:15 -0700 From: perryh@pluto.rain.com To: invalid.pointer@gmail.com Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: How to move vi to /bin Message-ID: <4a0d1a07.fZIhzrRdPEy8LIdq%perryh@pluto.rain.com> In-Reply-To: <4A0D0FD6.4040107@gmail.com> References: <cb0fa7b70905130021t390bb560r4a1dd64ab3b2e79@mail.gmail.com> <200905142019.56242.mel.flynn%2Bfbsd.questions@mailing.thruhere.net> <4A0D0FD6.4040107@gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Manish Jain <invalid.pointer@gmail.com> wrote: > From all the discussion I have walked through on the issue of > where to place vi, it does appear FreeBSD has a skewed policy > on the issue. There are plenty of reasons you might need access > an editor in single-user mode - editing fstab is just one. > Having to use the workarounds suggested in place of vi is not > so good, and manually moving vi to /bin is not simply a matter > of 'mv /usr/bin/vi /bin/'. > > One of the things I would dearly like to see in a future release > is vi being placed under /bin. Maybe put something like this [untested] in /bin/vi: #!/bin/sh [ -x /usr/bin/vi ] && exec /usr/bin/vi "$@" exec /rescue/vi "$@" That should run /usr/bin/vi if it's available, else fall back to /rescue/vi. Beats linking /rescue/vi into /bin, since that would cause the statically-linked version to be used by anyone who has /bin ahead of /usr/bin in PATH, even when the dynamically-linked version is available.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4a0d1a07.fZIhzrRdPEy8LIdq%perryh>