Re: vi ?

From: HTom4722@aol.com
Date: Thu Jun 22 2000 - 20:38:19 CEST


In a message dated 6/22/00 7:43:29 AM Central Daylight Time,
khz@stardivision.de writes:

Ummm. Recent versions seem to need libc6 :(
 
http://rufus.w3.org/linux/RPM/VByName.html
 
I don't know if this is actually "requires", though, or if it's just that
those binaries have been compiled that way.

It should be -smaller- under Linux.

And I don't have time to look into it until after about the 10th of July at
all. :(
 
htom

> On 22.06.00, 10:32:28, htom wrote:
>
> > Vim, however, is too big for muLinux.
> > I'm not even sure you could shrink it to be a single floppy
> > addon.
>
> Is it really /that/ big?
>
> At the moment I am using it under Windows NT and get the
> following information:
>
> [j:\somepath]which vim
>
> VIM is an Executable File in J:\anotherpath\ =
> 19.02.98 10:13 515.072 vim.exe
>
> Seems not sooo big... but I did never look for it's size
> when being in Linux, who could have a short look and tell us?
>
> Karl-Heinz
> --
> http://home.snafu.de/khz/
>
> "Why do we have to hide from the police, Daddy?" Dave Fischer
> "Because we use vi, son. They use emacs." 1995/06/19
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mulinux-unsubscribe@sunsite.auc.dk
For additional commands, e-mail: mulinux-help@sunsite.auc.dk



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Sat Feb 08 2003 - 15:27:15 CET