Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!rutgers!sri-unix!teknowledge-vaxc!uw-beaver!tektronix!sequent!mntgfx!gssc!jdm
From: jdm@gssc.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: vi on system v, sed on all unixs
Message-ID: <356@gssc.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 20-Mar-87 13:23:53 EST
Article-I.D.: gssc.356
Posted: Fri Mar 20 13:23:53 1987
Date-Received: Thu, 26-Mar-87 06:58:13 EST
Reply-To: jdm@gssc.UUCP (John D. Miller)
Distribution: comp.unix.wizards
Organization: Graphic Software Systems, Beaverton Or
Lines: 25
Keywords: flame
Summary: !@#$%{ limitations!!

vi on system 5 is severely limited (in my opinion) by limiting the size of
files that can be edited.  on bsd, i can vi a seemingly infinetly large
file (there is *some* limit, of course), but a file of a few hundred K or
so bugs out on system v with the complaint that the temp file is too large.
(yes, i have plenty of room on my filesystems.)

granted, i have use for this only on occasion, like editing a postscript
troff output file, but dammit, limitations are for toys, not real tools.

a related flame: sed is useless for binary files.  if you want to change an
ascii string embedded in a binary file, forget it.  sed wants to read \n
terminated lines and can't be told otherwise.  

anyone have any other slick way to change the name of a subroutine embedded 
in a .o?  i would have thought that:

    % sed 's/_func/_Func/' < mod.o > newmod.o

would have been great, but that doesn't work.

-- jdm
-- 
in real life:  John D. Miller, Graphic Software Systems, Inc., Beaverton OR
...!{tektronix!verdix}!sequent!gssc!jdm                      (503) 641-2200
...!mntgfx!gssc!jdm                          "Roger.  Go with throttle up."