[sf-lug] written likely using vi/vim

[jim]

I used vi



On 07/19/2016 05:38 AM, Michael Paoli wrote:
> Or semi-simulated, as one typically wouldn't see that first "i" ...
> unless one typed it twice.  And I'm thinking perhaps not vim,
> though I think that host may have both?  Let's see ...
> $ update-alternatives --display vi
> vi - auto mode
>   link currently points to /usr/bin/nvi
> /usr/bin/nvi - priority 20
>   slave vi.1.gz: /usr/share/man/man1/nvi.1.gz
> /usr/bin/vim.tiny - priority 10
>   slave vi.1.gz: /usr/share/man/man1/vim.1.gz
>   slave vi.fr.1.gz: /usr/share/man/fr/man1/vim.1.gz
>   slave vi.it.1.gz: /usr/share/man/it/man1/vim.1.gz
>   slave vi.ja.1.gz: /usr/share/man/ja/man1/vim.1.gz
>   slave vi.pl.1.gz: /usr/share/man/pl/man1/vim.1.gz
>   slave vi.ru.1.gz: /usr/share/man/ru/man1/vim.1.gz
> Current 'best' version is '/usr/bin/nvi'.
> $
> Yes, thank goodness we're not defaulting to vim [okay, so I've got a
> rather biased opinion], but hey, it's about choice, both are there, so,
> if someone wants vim, they can type vim and they've got it ... or they
> can even set up an alias or wrapper for themselves if they wish.
>
> A vim(1) session more commonly looks like this:
> :q!
> E37: No write since last change (add ! to override)
> E162: No write since last change for buffer "[No Name]"
> Press ENTER or type command to continue
> :q!!
> E488: Trailing characters
> :q
> E37: No write since last change (add ! to override)
> :f /dev/null
> :w!
> :q!
>
> Yes, vim can be *highly* annoying:
> http://www.rawbw.com/~mp/linux/vim/vim_annoyances.txt
>
>> From: aaronco36 <aaronco36 at linuxwaves.com>
>> Subject: Re: [sf-lug] SF-LUG website (& editing thereof)
>> Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 18:33:48 -0700
>
>> Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 16:21:25 +0000
>> From: jim <jim at well.com>
>> To: sf-lug at linuxmafia.com
>> Subject: Re: [sf-lug] SF-LUG website (& editing thereof) [was: Re:
>>     Noisebridge SF-LUG (Noisebridge Linux discussion supported by 
>> SF-LUG,
>>     ...)]
>>
>> written likely using vi/vim.......
>>> i
>>>
>>> The sf-lug web site is now different, possibly better: 
>>> http://www.sf-lug.org/
>>>
>>> :wq
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sf-lug mailing list
> sf-lug at linuxmafia.com
> http://linuxmafia.com/mailman/listinfo/sf-lug
> Information about SF-LUG is at http://www.sf-lug.org/
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://linuxmafia.com/pipermail/sf-lug/attachments/20160719/898d1ad0/attachment.html>