myron@nvuxl.UUCP (02/27/89)
I am curious if there is an editor software available that is similar (the more the better) to the UNIX vi editor, but can be run from an IBM-PC in MS-DOS. I would appreciate any help!
genemans@eleazar.dartmouth.edu (Jan Genemans) (02/27/89)
myron@nvuxl.UUCP writes: >I am curious if there is an editor software available that is similar (the more >the better) to the UNIX vi editor, but can be run from an IBM-PC in MS-DOS. I too would like to know where I could get my hands on one. So could you please post it. Thanks. _______________________________________________________________________________ Jan K. Genemans, at USMMA genemans@eleazar.dartmouth.edu
rsmith@vms.macc.wisc.edu (Rusty Smith, MACC) (02/27/89)
In article <688@nvuxl.UUCP>, myron@nvuxl.UUCP writes... >I am curious if there is an editor software available that is similar (the more >the better) to the UNIX vi editor, but can be run from an IBM-PC in MS-DOS. > >I would appreciate any help! There was a version of Vi posted to Comp.binaries.ibm.pc on Feb 19. Rusty Smith Internet: rsmith@vms.macc.wisc.edu MACC Data Communications Bitnet: rsmith@wiscmacc (608) 263-6307 Univ. of Wisconsin @ Madison
ked@garnet.berkeley.edu (Earl H. Kinmonth) (02/28/89)
In article <688@nvuxl.UUCP> myron@nvuxl.UUCP writes: >the better) to the UNIX vi editor, but can be run from an IBM-PC in MS-DOS. MKS (Mortice Kern Systems) 35 King Street Waterloo, Ontario N2J 2W9 800-265-2797 (voice orders) 519-884-8861 (fax) Offers a variety of packages that include vi, awk, and other **IX utilities. These are as close to the "real" thing as you can get under MiSerable Dos. No connection with the company except as a very, very satisfied user.
debra@alice.UUCP (Paul De Bra) (02/28/89)
In article <12406@dartvax.Dartmouth.EDU> genemans@eleazar.dartmouth.edu (Jan Genemans) writes: }myron@nvuxl.UUCP writes: } }>I am curious if there is an editor software available that is similar (the more }>the better) to the UNIX vi editor, but can be run from an IBM-PC in MS-DOS. } >I too would like to know where I could get my hands on one. }So could you please post it. Thanks. There is a produkt call the MKS toolkit that has lots of Unix utilities running on MS-DOS or PC-DOS. Look in your favorite magazine for adds. Paul. -- ------------------------------------------------------ |debra@research.att.com | uunet!research!debra | ------------------------------------------------------
nolan@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Michael C. Nolan) (02/28/89)
Custom Software Systems P.O. Box 678, Natick, MA 01760 (617) 653-2555 makes PC/VI (tm) which behaves exactly like vi as far as is possible under DOS. It seems to work fine and comes with a complete vi manual, which finally tells me how my unix vi works. I don't remember exactly but I think it was about $150. I have no connection with the company except as a satisfied user. -- nolan@hiips.lpl.arizona.edu; ...!noao!solpl!hiips
wad@houxv.ATT.COM (R.WADSACK) (02/28/89)
In article <688@nvuxl.UUCP>, myron@nvuxl.UUCP writes: > I am curious if there is an editor software available that is similar (the more > the better) to the UNIX vi editor, but can be run from an IBM-PC in MS-DOS. > > I would appreciate any help! Mortice Kern Systems, Inc. sells a version of 'vi' that will run on your PC. It is claimed to be the "best UNIX(R) editor available today for your PC". It's advertised as fully compatible with UNIX(R) SVR3. It retails for $75.00 (9/88). Call them at 1-800-265-2797 for further info.
saal@sfsup.UUCP (+Saal S.) (02/28/89)
In article <1184@houxv.ATT.COM+ wad@houxv.ATT.COM (R.WADSACK) writes: +In article <688@nvuxl.UUCP>, myron@nvuxl.UUCP writes: +> I am curious if there is an editor software available that is similar (the more +> the better) to the UNIX vi editor, but can be run from an IBM-PC in MS-DOS. +> I would appreciate any help! +Mortice Kern Systems, Inc. sells a version of 'vi' that will +run on your PC. It is claimed to be the "best UNIX(R) editor +available today for your PC". It's advertised as fully +compatible with UNIX(R) SVR3. It retails for $75.00 (9/88). +Call them at 1-800-265-2797 for further info. How does this vi deal with the ".exrc" file? I assume there is a variable you can set somewhere that sets the name? -- Sam Saal ..!attunix!saal Vayiphtach HaShem et Peah HaAtone
ftw@masscomp.UUCP (Farrell Woods) (03/01/89)
In article <12406@dartvax.Dartmouth.EDU> genemans@eleazar.dartmouth.edu (Jan Genemans) writes: >myron@nvuxl.UUCP writes: >>I am curious if there is an editor software available that is similar (the more >>the better) to the UNIX vi editor, but can be run from an IBM-PC in MS-DOS. >I too would like to know where I could get my hands on one. >So could you please post it. Thanks. Both of you should trek out to a local bookstore and pick up any of the following magazines: Dr. Dobbs Journal, BYTE, Computer Language... All should contain advertisments from two companies: Polytron and MKS. Both places offer Unix-like tools for the PC, including vi. I have no experience with either outfit or their products, so I'm not qualified to comment on them. -- Farrell T. Woods Voice: (508) 692-6200 x2471 MASSCOMP Operating Systems Group Internet: ftw@masscomp.com 1 Technology Way uucp: {backbones}!masscomp!ftw Westford, MA 01886 OS/2: Half an operating system
ftw@masscomp.UUCP (Farrell Woods) (03/01/89)
In article <1247@dogie.edu> rsmith@vms.macc.wisc.edu (Rusty Smith, MACC) writes: >There was a version of Vi posted to Comp.binaries.ibm.pc on Feb 19. I've tried this editor. It's called "STEVIE", and it is acceptable only for you smallest editing tasks. It's just too flaky to be used for anything you consider important. -- Farrell T. Woods Voice: (508) 692-6200 x2471 MASSCOMP Operating Systems Group Internet: ftw@masscomp.com 1 Technology Way uucp: {backbones}!masscomp!ftw Westford, MA 01886 OS/2: Half an operating system
ftw@masscomp.UUCP (Farrell Woods) (03/01/89)
In article <733@masscomp.UUCP> I wrote: >In article <1247@dogie.edu> rsmith@vms.macc.wisc.edu (Rusty Smith, MACC) writes: > >>There was a version of Vi posted to Comp.binaries.ibm.pc on Feb 19. >I've tried this editor. It's called "STEVIE", and it is acceptable only >for you smallest editing tasks. It's just too flaky to be used for anything >you consider important. I should have paid attention to the date: I've not tried this one. My bad experience with STEVIE was an older posting. My apologies. (Now if I could find out why I couldn't cancel my response...) -- Farrell T. Woods Voice: (508) 692-6200 x2471 MASSCOMP Operating Systems Group Internet: ftw@masscomp.com 1 Technology Way uucp: {backbones}!masscomp!ftw Westford, MA 01886 OS/2: Half an operating system
probinso@psu-cs.UUCP (Pat Robinson) (03/01/89)
In article <688@nvuxl.UUCP> myron@nvuxl.UUCP writes: >I am curious if there is an editor software available that is similar (the more >the better) to the UNIX vi editor, but can be run from an IBM-PC in MS-DOS. > Yes its called vi as well. We have it here and it runs on your basic IBM compatible/MS-DOS. I don't work with it alot, although I know some of the commands are different. Pat Robinson UUCP: {ucbvax, decvax, allegra, hplabs}!tektronix!psu-cs!probinso CSNET: probinso@cs.pdx.edu ARPANET: probinso%cs.pdx.edu@relay.cs.net
phil@diablo.amd.com (Phil Ngai) (03/01/89)
In article <37364@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> Michael C. Nolan <nolan@cis.ohio-state.edu> writes: |Custom Software Systems P.O. Box 678, Natick, MA 01760 (617) 653-2555 CSS is dead because they were distributing software illegally derived from Unix source code and AT&T found out. It's a shame because their stuff was very BSD like and I really prefer it over MKS, the only alternative around that I know of. -- Phil Ngai, phil@diablo.amd.com {uunet,decwrl,ucbvax}!amdcad!phil "System V, consider it sub-standard."
w-colinp@microsoft.UUCP (Colin Plumb) (03/01/89)
ked@garnet.berkeley.edu (Earl H. Kinmonth) wrote: > MKS (Mortice Kern Systems) > > Offers a variety of packages that include vi, awk, and other **IX utilities. > These are as close to the "real" thing as you can get under MiSerable Dos. > > No connection with the company except as a very, very satisfied user. I'd like to second this recommendation. You can ^Z out of vi back into sh (the Korn shell)! Everything is wonderfullest! Here's the list of what's in the "MKS Toolkit": alias (part of /bin/sh) awk (new awk, as described in "The AWK Programming Language") banner basename break (part of /bin/sh) c (no, not cc) cal cat cd (also chdir) chmod cmp comm compress continue(part of /bin/sh) cp (no -r, sigh) cpio crypt (adds DES encryption to Unix utility) ctags cut date dd deroff dev (Messy-DOS specific; prints info on all installed device drivers) df diff diff3 dirname . (part of /bin/sh) du echo (separate and part of /bin/sh) ed env eval (part of /bin/sh) exec (part of /bin/sh) exit (part of /bin/sh) expand export (part of /bin/sh) expr fc (also r and history; part of /bin/sh) fg file (uses /etc/magic) find fmt fold getopt grep (also fgrep and egrep gres (stolen from MINIX - simple subset of sed) head help (sorry, no man pages, but this gives a few lines of help) init (reads /etc/inittab and everything) jobs join kill lc let (part of /bin/sh) line login (uses /etc/passwd and everything) ls mkdir mv nl nm od (can also dump raw disks) pack passwd paste pcat pg (and more) pr print (part of /bin/sh) prof (DOS-specific implementation; requires no special linking) ps pwd (separate and part of /bin/sh) read (part of /bin/sh) readonly(builtin alias in /bin/sh) return (part of /bin/sh) rev rm rmdir sed set (part of /bin/sh) sh (full korn shell including command-line editing; also includes rsh) shift (part of /bin/sh) size sleep sort spell split strings strip sum switch (lets you use - instead of / as option char in Messy-DOS) sync tail tee test (separate and part of /bin/sh; also [) time (separate and part of /bin/sh) times (part of /bin/sh) touch tr trap (part of /bin/sh) true (part of /bin/sh; also :) tty typeset (part of /bin/sh; nothing to do with troff or typesetting) ulimit (part of /bin/sh; of limited usefulness) unalias (part of /bin/sh) uname uncompress unexpand uniq unpack unset (part of /bin/sh) unstrip (Messy-DOS specific; puts symbols from a .map file into a .exe) vi wc whence (part of /bin/sh) which who yacc -- -Colin (uunet!microsoft!w-colinp) "Don't listen to me. I never do."
wnp@killer.DALLAS.TX.US (Wolf Paul) (03/01/89)
In article <4872@sfsup.UUCP> saal@/doc/dsg/saalUUCP (xt1124-+Saal S.) writes: >+run on your PC. It is claimed to be the "best UNIX(R) edito ... > >How does this vi deal with the ".exrc" file? >I assume there is a variable you can set somewhere >that sets the name? It uses $HOME/ex.rc, as well EXINIT env. variable. So you can say something like "so virc" in your EXINIT, if you don't want to use the ex.rc file. And I agree that it is a pretty good vi editor -- use it all the time! Wolf -- Wolf N. Paul * 3387 Sam Rayburn Run * Carrollton TX 75007 * (214) 306-9101 UUCP: killer!wnp ESL: 62832882 DOMAIN: wnp@killer.dallas.tx.us TLX: 910-380-0585 EES PLANO UD
overby@agrigene.UUCP (Scott Overby) (03/01/89)
>I am curious if there is an editor software available that is similar (the more >the better) to the UNIX vi editor, but can be run from an IBM-PC in MS-DOS. > >I too would like to know where I could get my hands on one. >So could you please post it. Thanks. > The MKS Toolkit from: Mortice Kern Systems Inc. 35 King St. North Waterloo, Ontario N2j 2W9 519-884-2251 includes a vi editor along with other UNIX shell commands that run under MS-DOS. Cost, I think is around $150 US. I am not a representative of MKS, only a satisfied customer. Scott Overby Agrigenetics, Inc Madison, WI
jerry@starfish.Convergent.COM (Gerald Hawkins) (03/02/89)
From article <12406@dartvax.Dartmouth.EDU>, by genemans@eleazar.dartmouth.edu (Jan Genemans): > myron@nvuxl.UUCP writes: >>I am curious if there is an editor available that is similar (the more >>the better) to the UNIX vi editor, but can be run from an IBM-PC in MS-DOS. > > I too would like to know where I could get my hands on one. > So could you please post it. Thanks. > Jan K. Genemans, at USMMA genemans@eleazar.dartmouth.edu - - There is such an editor in the public domain or shareware. I think it is on Simtel 20. However (no flame intended) why the heck would you want such an abomination? vi is horrible and unfriendly ... I've used lots of editors and vi is almost the worst. Rainy Days and Automatic Weapons Fire Alway Get Me Down. These opinions are mine. Jerry. (jerry@starfish.convergent.COM) -----
wnp@killer.DALLAS.TX.US (Wolf Paul) (03/02/89)
In article <776@microsoft.UUCP> w-colinp@microsoft.uucp (Colin Plumb) writes: >ked@garnet.berkeley.edu (Earl H. Kinmonth) wrote: >> MKS (Mortice Kern Systems) >> >> Offers a variety of packages that include vi, awk, and other **IX utilities. >> These are as close to the "real" thing as you can get under MiSerable Dos. > >I'd like to second this recommendation. You can ^Z out of vi back >into sh (the Korn shell)! Everything is wonderfullest! > >Here's the list of what's in the "MKS Toolkit": > ... >cpio Very good! It has a (non-standard) option to compress each file before adding it to the archive; unfortunately limited by the fact that MKS' compress does not support 16-bit compression. Another limitation is that of course, such compressed cpio archives are not directly unpackable under UNIX -- you have to unpack them, and then manually run each extracted file through uncompress. Maybe this feature could be added to afio or pax, or maybe MSK could release the source for their cpio to the net? But I'd understand if they didn't :-). >gres (stolen from MINIX - simple subset of sed) I don't think that's true -- gres was in my first copy of the Toolkit about a year before MINIX was published. I think both the Toolkit and MINIX got both the name and the idea from an earlier UNIX version. >init (reads /etc/inittab and everything) It even lets you speciy a device other than con for shell i/o -- i.e start a login on com1, so you can call your machine on the phone. Only problem with that, last time I tried it, was that it still expected to read the password from the console keyboard, so you could only log into accounts without a password that way. Maybe that's been fixed -- comments from MKS? >login (uses /etc/passwd and everything) See note above about password always being read from console >switch (lets you use - instead of / as option char in Messy-DOS) But you should really use their shell rather than COMMAND.COM -- even with this option. >uname Uses the volume label of the boot disk as the node name; the other options return the DOS version/release and the CPU type >compress >uncompress >zcat Unfortunately these handle only 12-bit compression and can't handle UNIX-compressed files (usually 16-bit) >vi By itself, worth the price of the Toolkit. I have no connection to MKS either, except as a satisfied customer. Wolf -- Wolf N. Paul * 3387 Sam Rayburn Run * Carrollton TX 75007 * (214) 306-9101 UUCP: killer!wnp ESL: 62832882 DOMAIN: wnp@killer.dallas.tx.us TLX: 910-380-0585 EES PLANO UD
w-colinp@microsoft.UUCP (Colin Plumb) (03/02/89)
saal@/doc/dsg/saalUUCP (xt1124-+Saal S.) wrote: > How does this vi deal with the ".exrc" file? > I assume there is a variable you can set somewhere > that sets the name? "EDITOR INITIALIZATION At editor startup time, any initialization code is executed. These are EX commands located either in the environment or in a file. If the en- vironment variable EXINIT is found it is executed. Otherwise the file ex.rc is sourced. It is sought under the current directory, then under the directory goven in the HOME environmant variable if that variable exists; then under the root (ROOTDIR or "/"). See environ(5) for more information on these environmant variables. LIMITS * Maximum number of lines: 50K (50 * 1024). * Length of longest line: 1K (1024) bytes including \r\n. * Longest command line: 160 bytes * Length of filenames: 128 bytes * Length of remembered regular expressions: 256 bytes * Number of map, map! or abbreviate entries: 64 each. * Number of saved keystrokes for ".' in VI: 128. * Length of the lhs of map, map! or abbreviate: 10 bytes. * Max number of characters in a tag name: 30. * Number of characters in a ":" escape from VI: 128. * Number of characters in the global command: 256 including newlines. * Requires 128K of memory plus the set option maxbuffers K of auxilli- ary memory. Auxilliary memory is freed during ctrl-Z, :stop, :! :w!, .,.!, and :r! commands. During startup, maxbuffers is changes to reflect available memory; at least 32K is required." By the way, :set scrupdate=1 currently speeds things up a lot. It's considered a bug that this is necessary, and will eventually get fixed. (It doesn't work on some systems, and the detection logic is currently mixed up.) -- -Colin (uunet!microsoft!w-colinp) "Don't listen to me. I never do." - The Doctor
brown@nicmad.UUCP (Vidiot) (03/03/89)
In article <1184@houxv.ATT.COM> wad@houxv.ATT.COM (R.WADSACK) writes:
<Mortice Kern Systems, Inc. sells a version of 'vi' that will
<run on your PC. It is claimed to be the "best UNIX(R) editor
<available today for your PC". It's advertised as fully
<compatible with UNIX(R) SVR3. It retails for $75.00 (9/88).
<Call them at 1-800-265-2797 for further info.
According to the latest PC Connections catalog, the MKS VI (v 2.3) is
listed at $149, with their price being $135.
Call 1-800-336-1166 for ordering and free (UPS gnd) shipping.
--
harvard-\ att--\
Vidiot ucbvax!uwvax!astroatc!nicmad!brown
rutgers-/ decvax--/
ARPA/INTERNET: nicmad!brown%astroatc.UUCP@spool.cs.wisc.edumiket@brspyr1.BRS.Com (Mike Trout) (03/04/89)
In article <733@masscomp.UUCP>, ftw@masscomp.UUCP (Farrell Woods) writes: > In article <1247@dogie.edu> rsmith@vms.macc.wisc.edu (Rusty Smith, MACC) writes: > >There was a version of Vi posted to Comp.binaries.ibm.pc on Feb 19. > I've tried this editor. It's called "STEVIE", and it is acceptable only > for you smallest editing tasks. It's just too flaky to be used for anything > you consider important. In other words, it's exactly like vi itself. -- NSA food: Iran sells Nicaraguan drugs to White House through CIA, SOD & NRO. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Michael Trout (miket@brspyr1)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ BRS Information Technologies, 1200 Rt. 7, Latham, N.Y. 12110 (518) 783-1161 "God forbid we should ever be 20 years without...a rebellion." Thomas Jefferson
rac@sherpa.UUCP (Roger A. Cornelius) (03/04/89)
From article <7374@killer.DALLAS.TX.US>, by wnp@killer.DALLAS.TX.US (Wolf Paul):
- In article <776@microsoft.UUCP> w-colinp@microsoft.uucp (Colin Plumb) writes:
->ked@garnet.berkeley.edu (Earl H. Kinmonth) wrote:
->> MKS (Mortice Kern Systems)
-
->compress
->uncompress
->zcat
-
- Unfortunately these handle only 12-bit compression and can't handle
- UNIX-compressed files (usually 16-bit)
If I remember correctly, the MKS compress programs will handle up to 14
bit compression. One thing I don't like about them though, is they
won't compress/decompress in place. They only write to stdout, so to
do something like 'compress -d *.c', requires a for loop or something
similar.
Rogerdavid@wubios.wustl.edu (David J. Camp) (03/04/89)
In article <12406@dartvax.Dartmouth.EDU> genemans@eleazar.dartmouth.edu (Jan Genemans) writes: :>myron@nvuxl.UUCP writes: :> :>>I am curious if there is an editor software available that is similar (the more :>>the better) to the UNIX vi editor, but can be run from an IBM-PC in MS-DOS. :> :>I too would like to know where I could get my hands on one. :>So could you please post it. Thanks. It seems like I saw a reference to one the the info-ibmpc list, which would mean it would be available from simtel20.arpa . I am not sure. -David- -- Bitnet: david@wubios.wustl ^ Mr. David J. Camp Internet: david%wubios@wucs1.wustl.edu < * > Box 8067, Biostatistics uucp: uunet!wucs1!wubios!david v 660 South Euclid Washington University Medical School Saint Louis, MO 63110
bga@bgalli.eds.com (Billy G. Allie) (03/04/89)
In article <7374@killer.DALLAS.TX.US>, wnp@killer.DALLAS.TX.US (Wolf Paul) writes: < [refering to the MKS cpio command] < Very good! It has a (non-standard) option to compress each file before < adding it to the archive; unfortunately limited by the fact that MKS' < compress does not support 16-bit compression. Another limitation is < that of course, such compressed cpio archives are not directly < unpackable under UNIX -- you have to unpack them, and then manually < run each extracted file through uncompress. Archives created with the -z (non-standard) option of the MKS cpio command can be unpacked with the following command (filename is the name of the compressed archive file): zcat filename | cpio -ic assuming that the '-c' option was used in creating the archive. In fact the '-z' option is meant equivalent with the following pipelines: MKS command UNIX pipeline ---------------------- --------------------------------------- cpio -oz<other options> <--> cpio -o<other options> | compress -b 14 cpio -iz<other options> <--> uncompress | cpio -i<other options> BTW, the -z option was added because MS-DOS does not have multi-tasking or true pipes. To compress the archive on MS-DOS using pipes would require a temporary file big enough to hold the content of the entire archive. By building the compression into cpio, this temporary file is not needed. < [refering to the MKS compress, uncompress and zcat commands] < Unfortunately these handle only 12-bit compression and can't handle < UNIX-compressed files (usually 16-bit) These commands can handle up to 14-bit compression modes. This is not a great concern to me since I have a version of compress that will handle 16-bit compression on MS-DOS. One fact that wasn't mentioned is the capability of the MKS Korn shell has of passing up to 5Kbytes of arguments to the MS-DOS programs. Of course, the programs must know how to access these arguments (all MKS toolkit programs do this). I have no connection to MKS except as a satisfied customer. -- ____ | Billy G. Allie | Internet..: bga@bgalli.eds.com | /| | 7436 Hartwell | UUCP......: uunet!{mcf|edsews}!bgalli!bga |-/-|----- | Dearborn, MI 48126 | Compuserve: 76337,2061 |/ |LLIE | (313) 582-1540 | Genie.....: BGALLIE
john@agora.UUCP (John Cavanaugh) (03/04/89)
In article <12406@dartvax.Dartmouth.EDU> genemans@eleazar.dartmouth.edu (Jan Genemans) writes: >myron@nvuxl.UUCP writes: > >>I am curious if there is an editor software available that is similar (the more >>the better) to the UNIX vi editor, but can be run from an IBM-PC in MS-DOS. > >I too would like to know where I could get my hands on one. >So could you please post it. Thanks. > > I sent a letter to the original poster but if there is more interest... I saw a vi-like editor posted to c.b.i.p.c a few weeks ago and grabbed. I can't vouch for it since I haven't had the time to use it yet but I think I remember Rhaul liked it. So you should check there first. If you can't find it, let me know; I would be happy to mail you a copy. > >_______________________________________________________________________________ >Jan K. Genemans, at USMMA genemans@eleazar.dartmouth.edu -John Cavanaugh ...!tektronix!tessi!agora!john ============================================================================= "Thinking we're all getting older and wiser, when we're just getting old" -David Gilmour
ftw@masscomp.UUCP (Farrell Woods) (03/05/89)
In article <5507@brspyr1.BRS.Com> miket@brspyr1.BRS.Com (Mike Trout) writes: >In article <733@masscomp.UUCP>, I wrote: >> I've tried this editor. It's called "STEVIE", and it is acceptable only >> for you smallest editing tasks. It's just too flaky to be used for anything >> you consider important. >In other words, it's exactly like vi itself. You must have forgotten a smiley face there. I won't argue the merits of one editor vs. another. I was pointing out that the last version of STEVIE I picked up was simply unrelaible. I don't recall having vi itself crash in the middle of something on my machine at work. -- Farrell T. Woods Voice: (508) 392-2471 Concurrent Computer Corporation Domain: ftw@masscomp.com 1 Technology Way uucp: {backbones}!masscomp!ftw Westford, MA 01886 OS/2: Half an operating system
dlawyer@balboa.eng.uci.edu (David Lawyer) (03/09/89)
In article <733@masscomp.UUCP> ftw@quasar.masscomp.UUCP (Farrell Woods) writes: >In article <1247@dogie.edu> rsmith@vms.macc.wisc.edu (Rusty Smith, MACC) writes: > >>There was a version of Vi posted to Comp.binaries.ibm.pc on Feb 19. > >I've tried this editor. It's called "STEVIE", and it is acceptable only The editor posted on Feb. 19 does not appear to be Stevie because it's written by a different person (Paul Vojta, ver. 1.9a) while Stevie is by Tony Andrews (ver. 3.45). I've used both and think Stevie is closer to the real vi. Stevie is larger and slightly slower. Stevie may also be used with Unix-like operating systems such as Minix so the source code may not get posted to the ibm.pc newsgroup. It was posted to comp.os.minix on 8 Dec. '88 but needs Microsoft C to compile.
root@conexch.UUCP (Larry Dighera) (03/09/89)
In article <7374@killer.DALLAS.TX.US> wnp@killer.Dallas.TX.US (Wolf Paul) writes: >In article <776@microsoft.UUCP> w-colinp@microsoft.uucp (Colin Plumb) writes: >>ked@garnet.berkeley.edu (Earl H. Kinmonth) wrote: >>Here's the list of what's in the "MKS Toolkit": >>compress >>uncompress >>zcat > >Unfortunately these handle only 12-bit compression and can't handle >UNIX-compressed files (usually 16-bit) [followup set to comp.sys.ibm.pc] You can get a copy of compress that will do 16-bit compression under PC-DOS from The Consultants' Exchange BBS. Call (714) 842-5851 and login as bbs (lower case). In the unix file area you will find several useful unix utilities that have been ported to PC-DOS. There is also a version of uncompress that will uncompress 16-bit files in only 256K of RAM. The file utools.arc contains many useful unix utilities. Here is a list of it's contents: Name Length Stowage SF Size now Date Time CRC ============ ======== ======== ==== ======== ========= ====== ==== cat.exe 10536 Crunched 21% 8363 21 Sep 87 2:48a 7413 cd.exe 8624 Crunched 23% 6707 21 Sep 87 2:48a 176e chmod.exe 8820 Crunched 21% 6992 21 Sep 87 2:48a ddf2 cp.exe 12936 Crunched 18% 10650 21 Sep 87 2:48a 7143 cpio.exe 25364 Crunched 15% 21710 7 Oct 87 8:36a d92c dbackup.exe 20230 Squeezed 13% 17679 21 Sep 87 2:48a eb1c dbackupv.c 16185 Crunched 51% 7935 21 Sep 87 2:47a f90f dbackupv.man 6676 Crunched 48% 3485 21 Sep 87 2:47a c9cf drestore.exe 21956 Squeezed 14% 19053 21 Sep 87 2:48a 75ea du.exe 8752 Crunched 22% 6879 21 Sep 87 2:48a c930 find.exe 12296 Crunched 17% 10280 21 Sep 87 2:53a 770b ls.exe 15874 Crunched 16% 13416 21 Sep 87 2:48a 24a8 mkdir.exe 6624 Crunched 23% 5160 21 Sep 87 2:48a bfce mv.exe 13038 Crunched 18% 10730 21 Sep 87 2:48a 753d od.exe 15870 Crunched 15% 13572 21 Sep 87 2:48a de98 pr.exe 14714 Crunched 17% 12296 21 Sep 87 2:48a 0aac rm.exe 10014 Crunched 21% 7976 21 Sep 87 2:48a 24b0 rmdir.exe 6626 Crunched 23% 5151 21 Sep 87 2:48a dbda touch.exe 11924 Crunched 19% 9681 21 Sep 87 2:48a 36fa utod.exe 10962 Crunched 21% 8768 21 Sep 87 2:48a 831a utools.doc 23801 Crunched 54% 11073 21 Sep 87 3:46a 1e58 wc.exe 10382 Crunched 22% 8186 21 Sep 87 2:48a 08b1 ==== ======== ==== ======== Total 22 292204 23% 225742 -- USPS: The Consultants' Exchange, PO Box 12100, Santa Ana, CA 92712 TELE: (714) 842-6348: BBS (N81); (714) 842-5851: Xenix guest account (E71) UUCP: conexch Any ACU 2400 17148425851 ogin:-""-ogin:-""-ogin: nuucp UUCP: ...!uunet!spsd!conexch!root || ...!trwrb!ucla-an!conexch!root
root@spdyne.UUCP (03/10/89)
sparks@corpane.UUCP writes: >In article <2386@iscuva.ISCS.COM>,carlp@iscuva.ISCS.COM (Carl Paukstis) writes: > > > > EDITOR WARS! > > As for "unfriendly", vi is hard to LEARN, not hard to USE. I assure you, I > > can be quite productive with vi - especially for quick jobs. > > I agree with you there. It is hard to learn. But once you master the wierd > commands, it's not so bad. As far as full screen editors go, it's my last > choice, but it's not real bad. Last choice? I can think of many, many that are worse...EDT for one.. > > > > > Sure, vi has some drawbacks; mainly it's outweighed by special-purpose > > solutions. BRIEF is quite good on the PC, and I tend to use Micro-EMACS Yes, I use BRIEF configured to work like VI. I have re-written the default macros completely. My set makes the program run almost exactly like vi except for the added ablility to do things like: Hex/Dec Calcalator, Column moves, Substitues across files, split screen edits (multiple files), 300 level un-do, Auto-save, etc, etc... > > sequence 'dw' to delete a word "unfriendly"? > > well, dw is not so bad, but let's look at some of the other commands: > > dd = delete line (why? why not dl?) Fast I presume.. > ZZ = end edit and save file (!!!!) Added for speed, I presume. You can use ':wq' if you prefer a non-cryptic command. > $ = end of file - Try End of Line... > A = insert begining at end of line !?!?! Append - What's so cryptic? >Personally I like EDT (yes I grew up on DEC). It's easy to use, the keypad >is designed to do most of the editing commands, like del-word, del-line, go >to end of line, go to beginning of line, cut, paste, etc. > >I like the keypad approach rather than the single letter commands in some >editors, because you don't have to leave insert mode in order to do editing. Yes, I just LOVE using EDT on a adm3a... Loads of fun...Ever try a NON-DEC terminal? YEEACH! Very hard to get anything useful done, and even with a keypad, I didn't like it as it was hard to learn.. (Now was '4' Paste or Cut?...) Just what do you do if you don't have that little plastic keypad layout? I loved it when I moved over to UNIX and got away from SOS (I didn't use EDT much as most of the termials weren't VT* compatiable.) By the way, in vi you can move the cursor in insert mode...IF you have your keypad. The only problem is if you move to a line that is shorter than your current position, then vi dumps you back out of insert mode. One of the things I like about VI/Brief is the ability to type: 1875G To jump to line 1,875 in a large program. Each module of my own code rarely gets this big, but I do have to maintain others' code too. I hate editors that require you to page down till you hit the right line.. (Last week I was told to "Add these 2 lines before line 1,875." With NO context. Easy in Brief/VI, only editor we had that could do it.) My only problems with Brief are: 1) 512 Character line length limit 2) 64K of lines max in buffer, siliently truncates file when written if > this number, but allows you to view the whole file (once). 3) Special macros are slow, such as the '%' to find matching brace, if you are going over 500+ lines and arn't going to find the brace. 4) Only method of handling mem errors is to write 'a file or two' to the disk, you can't save them under a diff name. And it doesn't do this automaticlly to a tmp file. > -- > John Sparks // Amiga | {rutgers|uunet}!ukma!corpane!sparks > \X/ UUCP | >> call D.I.S.K. @ 502/968-5401 thru 5406 << -Chert Pellett root@spdyne
lnewman@emdeng.Dayton.NCR.COM (Lee.A.Newman) (03/11/89)
In article <1000004@spdyne> root@spdyne.UUCP writes: >> > EDITOR WARS! > >Yes, I use BRIEF configured to work like VI. I have re-written the default >macros completely. My set makes the program run almost exactly like vi except >for the added ablility to do things like: Hex/Dec Calcalator, Column moves, >Substitues across files, split screen edits (multiple files), 300 level >un-do, Auto-save, etc, etc... > > > Yes, I just LOVE using EDT on a adm3a... Loads of fun...Ever try a NON-DEC >terminal? YEEACH! Very hard to get anything useful done, and even with >a keypad, I didn't like it as it was hard to learn.. (Now was '4' Paste or >Cut?...) Just what do you do if you don't have that little plastic keypad >layout? I loved it when I moved over to UNIX and got away from SOS (I didn't >use EDT much as most of the termials weren't VT* compatiable.) > It's quite interesting... Just about everyone I know is in love with the the first non-cumbersome editor they ever used... Remember - how well will your favorite editor work on a different keyboard... One without arrow keys... or without a keypad... or without an alt key... maybe no function keys... vi does have the advantage that it works with nearly ANY keyboard. >My only problems with Brief are: > <list deleted> Let me add one more problem with Brief: 5) It does not permit any nulls to appear in the source file. If any are found, it deletes them. (At least it gives you a message. Something like "Fixing nulls"). Quite a nasty fix! Ever accidentally Brief a binary file? Not fun.
sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) (03/14/89)
In article <1000004@spdyne>, root@spdyne.UUCP writes:
]
] Yes, I just LOVE using EDT on a adm3a... Loads of fun...Ever try a NON-DEC
] terminal? YEEACH! Very hard to get anything useful done, and even with
] a keypad, I didn't like it as it was hard to learn.. (Now was '4' Paste or
] Cut?...) Just what do you do if you don't have that little plastic keypad
] layout? I loved it when I moved over to UNIX and got away from SOS (I didn't
] use EDT much as most of the termials weren't VT* compatiable.)
You got me there! Yep, with EDT you have to have a VT* compatible
with the keypad. Otherwise you are out of luck. vi does have the advantage
of working with many different terminals easily. EDT does have a command
line mode (like the colon ':' in vi) so you can use it without a VT-*,
It's ctrl-z. from there you can do substituting (s/oldtext/newtext/wh sub
oldtext with newtext for the whole file) and stuff.
] ]
] One of the things I like about VI/Brief is the ability to type:
] 1875G
] To jump to line 1,875 in a large program.
]
In defense of EDT: try ctrl-z (to get the command prompt) and type
'1875' (apostrophes mine) and boom, there you are.
] -Chert Pellett
] root@spdyne
--
John Sparks // Amiga | {rutgers|uunet}!ukma!corpane!sparks
\X/ UUCP | >> call D.I.S.K. @ 502/968-5401 thru 5406 <<
Death is nature's way of telling you to slow down.