Since we are discussing this.... I too am used to (and quite happy with) vi. It does what I want.
Since moving to gentoo I have continued to type 'vi' when I want to edit a text file, in blissful ignorance of the fact that this is now a sym link to vim - or at least should have been.. Now this would have been fine if vim were a superset which, when invoked with the old name, behaved sensibly... appart from having to put up with the unnecessary bloat, ie -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 2041860 Apr 19 01:26 /usr/bin/vim -r-xr-xr-x 3 bin bin 225280 Jan 21 1997 /usr/bin/vi which does make a difference when you still have old machines running with 4Mb of ram... Even vi seemed big after 'ed'. Anyway, what has been bugging me about the vi imposter on gentoo is this gawdy psychadelic colourisation.... It seems that whatever colour scheme I choose for my xterms, some important part of my source file disappears because it is displayed in the background colour, or in something with very poor contrast over the background colour :-/ I don't know why other people arn't bitten by this. Perhaps it is something to do with the fact that I use a propper networked X terminal rather than sitting in the same room as my server. It has been so annoying that I have often resorted to copying files onto an old BSD machine to edit them, and then copy them back. So.. what is the secret to stopying vim from displaying text in in invisible colours? And how can I tell it to stop messing with the colours at all... I can't find anything in the man page, '-C' doesn't inhibit colourisation, nor does setting my TERM type to 'ansi' and don't really want to have to resort to reading extensive documentation on an application I wouldn't need if I had vi (there is still too much I have to read up on for things that I actually do want to know about...) Sorry if that sounds a bit whining, but it has been annoying me this afternoon, so I couldn't resist the chance to have a whinge when it came up on the list.. Regards, DigbyT On Thu, Apr 21, 2005 at 08:43:27PM +0200, Antoine wrote: > Eamon Caddigan wrote: > > Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >>On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 18:16:41 +0000 (UTC) Eamon Caddigan > >><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>| Vim's great, but sometimes you just want vi.=20 > >> > >>That's a shame, because I removed (traditional) vi from the tree. Your > >>choices are Vim, nvi, elvis or fixing traditional vi to work with > >>terminfo rather than termcap and submitting a bug with a patch. > > Can't you tell vim to act like "good ol' vi"? Is it still not "good ol' > vi", no matter how much they try and make it like it? > Cheers > Antoine > -- > gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list -- Digby R. S. Tarvin [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.digbyt.com -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
