Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!agate!ucbvax!mtxinu!sybase!orion!forrest
From: forrest@orion.sybase.com (Jon Forrest)
Newsgroups: comp.editors
Subject: Re: A Standard 'vi' (if such a thing exists)
Message-ID: <11958@sybase.sybase.com>
Date: 2 Dec 90 01:16:58 GMT
References: <11855@sybase.sybase.com> <764@pdxgate.UUCP> <90332.124931QQ11@LIVERPOOL.AC.UK>
Sender: news@Sybase.COM
Organization: Sybase, Inc.
Lines: 24

In article <90332.124931QQ11@LIVERPOOL.AC.UK> QQ11@LIVERPOOL.AC.UK writes:
>
>I would take AT&T's vi for SVR4 as a 'standard' unless BSD 4.4 is a
>radical improvement on the previous BSD versions....
>
>Alan Thew  : University of Liverpool Computer Laboratory
>Bitnet/Earn: QQ11@LIVERPOOL.AC.UK or QQ11%UK.AC.LIVERPOOL @ UKACRL

Since 'vi' was born in Berkeley and first appeared in one of the
PDP-11 BSD releases I don't see any reason to treat AT&T's version
as the true 'vi' other than just because of AT&T's relationship to
Unix. I'm wondering what the status of 'vi' will be in 4.4 BSD.
I heard that the reason why it's not public domain is because Bill
Joy and friends used some AT&T code. Since the current BSD project
is trying to sanitize BSD to make it freely distributable, maybe
they'll be able to make BSD free too.

----
Anything you read here is my opinion and in no way represents Sybase, Inc.

Jon Forrest WB6EDM
forrest@sybase.com
{pacbell,sun,{uunet,ucbvax}!mtxinu}!sybase!forrest
415-596-3422


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com