• communism@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    1 day ago

    Huh, vi for me has always been actual vi, not vim. Didn’t know some systems symlink vi to vim.

    • frezik
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      12 hours ago

      POSIX actually has a standard for vi, so it has to be there if you’re claiming some level of compliance. Standard vi is also more pedantic about usage than vim, and IIRC, vim will open up without its more hand holdy features if you launch it linked from vi.

    • toynbee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      1 day ago

      A long time ago, someone posted advocating symlinking vi to emacs. Evil, but entertaining.

    • lime!@feddit.nu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 day ago

      vim has a limited “vi-mode” that it uses if you call it as vi. so it could still be vim.

      • communism@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        Ohh that makes more sense. Yeah perhaps, although come to think of it I still need to install vim from the package manager even if vi works fresh out of the box so maybe not?

        • lime!@feddit.nu
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          i think there’s also a vim-mini that gets installed by default in some debian-based distros.

    • Xanza@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      Vim is the preferred experience, so it’s for end users. Unless you have a system with no real addons and classic *nix environment, you’re almost always going to be using Vim. Alpine linux is a good example of a stripped down environment that still uses Vi.