Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 22:19:57 -0400 (EDT) From: "Luke H." <hendrix@cockatoo.aus.org> To: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: asbestos suited static vi Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980414221916.6796A-100000@cockatoo.aus.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980414205515.17677B-100000@shell.futuresouth.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> That said, it DOES offer additional capabilities and flexibility; I can't > imagine anyone that would argue that. These come at a sacrifice which > many are not willing to make. What would be the interest in a package'd > static linked vi and supplementary fi les, and/or a source patch, so you > can choose to have a static vi in /bin if you choose? Several people have > expresses at least academic interest in it. So I think I may give it a > stab. What advice can anyone offer, caevets, wish list, etc in this? Maybe > eventually a set of packages of static binaries (shells, editors, etc) > that someone might want to plop into their oversized / partition... but > let's not get ahead of ourselves. > > IS there any interest, or any thoughts? Maybe just have a port/package that installs a static vi to /bin? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.980414221916.6796A-100000>