Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 16:10:38 +0100 From: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr> To: Ed Smith <abandon.every.hope@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Just wanted to install vim - had to spend entire day building X11 Message-ID: <xeiazkr86bgx.fsf@kobe.laptop> In-Reply-To: <4D2B036B.40503@gmail.com> (Ed Smith's message of "Mon, 10 Jan 2011 08:02:35 -0500") References: <AANLkTin_c0j9fbp-YMYx4mfdWsc4w3Zx5mgWB09mHbHC@mail.gmail.com> <xeiak4id6sbw.fsf@kobe.laptop> <4D2B036B.40503@gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 10 Jan 2011 08:02:35 -0500, Ed Smith <abandon.every.hope@gmail.com> wrote: > This seems bizarre. Logically, it would seem better to do a split like > vim (bare vim - what you would expect) and xvim (vim with X11) similar > to how emacs does emacs/xemacs. XEmacs[1] is not 'Emacs with X11 support', but a very different editor. The main GNU Emacs port (editors/emacs) does include support for X11, and it's actually a lot more pleasant to use under X window. [1] http://xemacs.org/ Its name is certainly slightly confusing now that people have gotten accustomed to all the 'foo' vs. 'xfoo' ports, but the XEmacs editor has been around for a *long* time, so let's not confuse it for something very different from what it is :)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?xeiazkr86bgx.fsf>