The question of moving vi to /bin

[Erik Osterholm]

On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 01:28:54PM +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 25 June 2009 pm 13:03:01 Manish Jain wrote:
> > > If you want to make a case for replacing ed(1), you're going
> > > to have to come up with some concrete reasons for doing so,
> > > not just make a (long and hyperbolic) statement that you
> > > don't like it.
> >
> > requirements of being interactive. That's one reason. Secondly,
> > how many times does an average commandline user even think of
> > using ed when he needs to edit a file, even in the extreme case
> > where there are no alternatives ?
> >
> isn't there ee in the base system?

ee is in /usr/bin, just like vi.

 
> > Till the improvements are in place, we need the alternative of
> > having vi under /bin rather than /usr/bin.
> >
> I do not see any reason to have a monster like vi there.

I agree, but for different reasons.

Though I love vi(m), I realize that not everyone does.  If the point
of all of this is to provide an editor which can be used by just about
anyone in the event that /usr is unavailable, vi will not fit the bill
any more than ex will.

ee is a better start, and it's conveniently 1/5 the size of vi.

 
> > But I guess my words are of no use when the people who matter
> > just won't listen. So I give any hopes in this regard.
> 
> I hope that they do not listen.
> 
> It would be even better to have an editor like joe in /bin than 
> anything like vi.

Certainly.

Erik