Date: Wed, 15 May 1996 19:38:25 -0700 From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> To: Michael Smith <msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au> Cc: kuku@gilberto.physik.rwth-aachen.de (Christoph P. Kukulies), freebsd-current@freefall.freebsd.org Subject: Re: /stand/ee Message-ID: <6878.832214305@time.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 16 May 1996 10:41:31 %2B0930." <199605160111.KAA01107@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > I agree that vi is not available in a standalone situation > > but after a successful installation or when /usr/bin/vi > > is available something else (vi) rather than /stand/ee should be > > chosen. It's vipw and not eepw and not emacspw :-) > > Oh yawn. If you know how to use vi you know how to set EDITOR in > your .cshrc. If you don't, then you want something a little more > intuitive. And, FWIW, I don't even like `ee' all that much - it's NOT the most intuitive of editors, it was simply both small and available. People keep suggesting `pico' to me, and it's what BSD/OS uses (so one could almost sort of claim an attempt at compatibility), but I've never seen it broken out of pine so I don't know how big it itself is. Jordan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?6878.832214305>