Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 13:25:58 +0200 From: "Julian H. Stacey" <jhs@freebsd.org> To: Chuck Robey <chuckr@glue.umd.edu> Cc: Narvi <narvi@haldjas.folklore.ee>, bvsmith@lbl.gov, ports@freebsd.org, gj@freebsd.org, me@freebsd.org, asami@freebsd.org Subject: Re: xfig.3.1.4 extension to support vi -C signals linkage Message-ID: <199608121126.NAA17054@vector.jhs.no_domain> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 11 Aug 1996 15:49:02 EDT." <Pine.OSF.3.95.960811154714.10084D-100000@thurston.eng.umd.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, Reference:
> From: Chuck Robey <chuckr@glue.umd.edu>
>
> On Sun, 11 Aug 1996, Narvi wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Sun, 11 Aug 1996, Chuck Robey wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, 11 Aug 1996, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> > >
> > > > I have developed an extension to xfig.3.1.4 (Ref. freebsd/ports/graphic
- s/xfig)
> > > > that allows an adjacent xterm running 'vi' to send a signal on each ':w
- '
> > > > that xfig interprets as a re-open & redisplay command.
> > > >
> > > > This mechanism is compatible with my previous work on vi ghostview & ch
- imera.
> > >
> > > I like the matchup, I wonder if there's some way to make something like
> > > this work inside the standard ports setup. There's not port of nvi (Keit
- h
> > > Bostic's latest version of vi) although it compiles easily on FreeBSD. D
- o
> > > you have pointers to your work on ghostview and and chimera?
> > >
> >
> > How about making it a separate, local port that would depend on the
> > presence of xfig and build a new xfig? Just like tclX does...
>
> I want to hear from Julian, does adding this functionality make any
> difference to how the port works in the absence of a patched vi?
No, none (the extended ports are fully backward compatible),
there'll just be an increased functionality that's not easily accessible,
at a cost of perhaps an extra 30/50 bytes in the executable
of those 3 {ghostview, chimera, xfig} ports.
> I'm
> looking for a reason why we would NOT want this mod in our ports?
> Can't think of any except those 30 or so bytes, I even default my extra
functionality as `off by default'.
> I'm
> thinking that maybe this should go into xfig, ghostview, chimera, and
> maybe a patched port of nvi.
Sounds nice to me :-)
> > > I sure like the basic idea, a timesaver for sure.
Yup :-) gj@freebsd.org has seen the {ghostview or chimera} + vi in action,
(I use it to type letters in groff & `wysiwyg' view it in gv, via make rules),
no one has seen the xfig + vi link mechanism yet though.
Julian
--
Julian H. Stacey jhs@freebsd.org http://www.freebsd.org/~jhs/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199608121126.NAA17054>