Date: Wed, 15 May 1996 20:02:22 -0700 From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> To: Michael Smith <msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au> Cc: kuku@gilberto.physik.rwth-aachen.de, freebsd-current@freefall.freebsd.org Subject: Re: /stand/ee Message-ID: <6996.832215742@time.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 16 May 1996 12:32:42 %2B0930." <199605160302.MAA02161@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Jordan K. Hubbard stands accused of saying: > > > > And, FWIW, I don't even like `ee' all that much - it's NOT the most > > intuitive of editors, it was simply both small and available. People > > keep suggesting `pico' to me, and it's what BSD/OS uses (so one could > > almost sort of claim an attempt at compatibility), but I've never seen > > it broken out of pine so I don't know how big it itself is. > > cain:~>ls -l `which pico` > -rwxr-xr-x 1 bin bin 110592 May 19 1995 /usr/local/bin/pico OK, that tells me a little something.. :-) I was actually referring to "big" as in code size in this context, e.g. how much resistance would I have to bringing it in. At one .c and one .1 file (and the NLS stuff), I felt pretty safe with ee. :-) Jordan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?6996.832215742>