[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
Grant Sewell wrote: > On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 16:50:02 +0000 (GMT) > Alex Charrett wrote: > >>> Terry Hill wrote: >>> >>>> I *detest* VI. And the other one. >> On the other hand there's bound to be ocassions where vi is all >> you've got to try and rescue a system with. > > Really?! In this day-and-age? Am I wrong in thinking that even > Tomsrtbt has more than just Vi? You're not even beginning to contemplate the range of possibilities. I work on machines running different distributions of Linux, the BSDs, sometimes Solaris. More often than not I don't get to install them, or they have no compilers, change control procedures don't allow non vendor-supported software to be installed or require suitable justification and sign-off for changes, or need expensive acceptance testing before deployment on production services or I'm just not allowed to install anything new. Sometimes they've been running for so long that you just can't build new code on them and older binaries don't exist. In many of those situations, using vi is just the path of least resistance and allows you to get what you need done fastest because it's pretty much always going to be there. Failing that, there's always ed :) James -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html