vim vs. (original) vi, not vs. older versions of vim.
vim vs. (original) vi, not vs. older versions of vim.
Posted Aug 30, 2005 23:55 UTC (Tue) by parimi (guest, #5773)In reply to: vim vs. (original) vi, not vs. older versions of vim. by tjc
Parent article: Vim's newest features (Linux.com)
I have alway's found redhat's default vimrc configuration annoying. Two options I hate the most are highlighting search (hlsearch on) and no autoindent for c/perl programs. I turn off these options in my ~/.vimrc but some of the default options (like noai) still remain set. As another solution, I execute vim -u ~/.vimrc <filename> but running :scriptnames in the editor still shows that /etc/vimrc was read. Does anyone know how to ask vim to only read my vimrc and nothing else?
Posted Aug 31, 2005 7:35 UTC (Wed)
by philips (guest, #937)
[Link]
Normally I end up recompiling vim since I use sometimes gvim and RH's gvim is just dumb [CENDORED] of [CENSORED], [CENSORED] and [CENSORED].
Recompilation helps. (Same goes for Solaris too.)
On SUSE and Debian, I found vim to be pretty okay - after few options tuned.
P.S. Most interesting thing, from another side of the fence, as I heard, hard-core Emacsers who use RH, normally insits on removing standard Emacs and using pacakges directly from GNU. Dunno why, but with all RH braindamages, I easily beleive that too.
Please notice RH never had Vim in default instalatation.vim vs. (original) vi, not vs. older versions of vim.
Probably it is a sign.
Most annoying features are text anti-aliasing and ridiculous GNOME integration, which kills bunch of standard vim shortcuts. I cannot imagine any sane person who can use that.