Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Vim 7.2 Released

kdawson posted more than 5 years ago | from the vigor-too dept.

Software 106

sanguisdex writes "After fifteen months of work: a brand new Vim release! This is a stable version. There are many bug fixes and updated runtime files. The only new feature worth mentioning is support for floating point. Upgrading from a previous version is highly recommended: a few crashing bugs and several security issues were fixed. For the details see the announcement or go directly to the download page."

cancel ×

106 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

in addition to the new release... (4, Informative)

yagu (721525) | more than 5 years ago | (#26803181)

O'Reilly released the latest new version of their vi book, (now "Learning the vi and Vim Editors") [amazon.com] last summer with seven new chapters devoted to vim!

Re:in addition to the new release... (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26804379)

Thanks for the tip. Went to look it up at Bokus.com (Swedish store) and found this perhaps a little too matching book under "People who bought this book also bough these": Bitterfittan. For those Swedish-challenged, it can be loosely translated as "The bitter cunt".

http://www.bokus.com/b/9780596529833.html?pt=search_result [bokus.com]

Re:in addition to the new release... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26808005)

vim...bitter cunt. Same thing.

Re:in addition to the new release... (1)

Per Wigren (5315) | more than 5 years ago | (#26809493)

That reminds me when I was looking at the Programming Python book at Adlibris, another Swedish online bookstore, a couple of years ago.
Under "People who bought this book also bought..." was both a "how to lose weight" book and a depression self cure book.

As a Ruby programmer I though that was hilarious. :)

Re:in addition to the new release... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26817241)

Ehh, how come you two aren't using bokfynd ?

First post! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26803193)

:x

In Soviet Russia.. (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26803251)

Vi kills Emacs!

Re:In Soviet Russia.. (3, Funny)

Jurily (900488) | more than 5 years ago | (#26804813)

:q!

Old news (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26803267)

This was release Aug. 9, 2008

Not news! (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26803273)

vim 7.2 released in August of 2008... ... this is news?

Vim 7.2 Released - Last Year (08 2008) (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26803277)

fixed for ya.

Re:Vim 7.2 Released - Last Year (08 2008) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26806823)

what is /. coming to? I need to read the news not the olds.

Vi has two modes ... (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26803283)

beep constantly, and break everything

Re:Vi has two modes ... (1)

Eudial (590661) | more than 5 years ago | (#26804035)

Ah, but it is very good at those things.:wq

Re:Vi has two modes ... (1)

mikelieman (35628) | more than 5 years ago | (#26806715)

:wq is too verbose. :x ftw

Re:Vi has two modes ... (1)

Wolfier (94144) | more than 5 years ago | (#26817789)

:wq is too verbose. :x ftw

try ZZ

Pssh. Vi. (1)

zippthorne (748122) | more than 5 years ago | (#26807695)

The problem with vim is that half the time you have to give it a quick bang before it'll do what you want.

Re:Pssh. Vi. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26807895)

So,then, Vim is male?

Re:Vi has two modes ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26806289)

come on now, it's a great editor for deleting things from files!

Go to the character of interest, hit x. Go to the line of interest and hit dd.

Of course, if you want to do more than delete, you are better off with notepad.

Vi[m], the editor endorsed by S&M parlors everywhere.

Note from a VIM user... (3, Informative)

sd.fhasldff (833645) | more than 5 years ago | (#26809955)

come on now, it's a great editor for deleting things from files!

Go to the character of interest, hit x. Go to the line of interest and hit dd.

Of course, if you want to do more than delete, you are better off with notepad.

I was very tempted to use my mod points to mod this TROLL, but I try staying far away from anything that even smells like "modding down stuff you disagree with", so I'll Feed the Troll, instead...

How do I search-replace SMARTLY (i.e. with regexp) in Notepad?

Does notepad support syntax highlighting?

Does notepad support "jumping" to the last position when reopening a file?

Does notepad support auto-indentation? Language-dependent auto-indentation?

Does notepad support multiple buffers? (cut-n-paste)

Does notepad support variable tabstops? Using spaces as tabs?

Does notepad support collapsing/folding sections into a single line?

These features are just a tiny fraction of what I use in VIM *every single day*. Notepad does none of these. I used to use emacs, because the insert, command and visual modes confused me. It really didn't take long to get used to, however, and I generally prefer VIM now (although I'm perfectly happy using emacs instead).

I feel I should now come up with a car analogy, comparing VIM and Notepad, but the only word that comes to mind is Yugo. And that would be Notepad, in case you were wondering.

Re:Note from a VIM user... (1)

Rhaban (987410) | more than 5 years ago | (#26810385)

Using spaces as tabs is evil.

Re:Note from a VIM user... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26810431)

Unless you're coding Python...

Re:Note from a VIM user... (1)

Ender_Stonebender (60900) | more than 5 years ago | (#26811321)

Using spaces as tabs is the Right Thing to do. Say you've got your editor set to tab stops every 4 characters, and I've got mine set to every 8 characters. If your files have tabs following other text (such as to put single-line comments in C sources), things that look perfectly lined up on your screen are all over the place on mine.

So set your editors to insert X number of spaces when you hit Tab.

Re:Note from a VIM user... (1)

Spacelem (189863) | more than 5 years ago | (#26811829)

But then my comments would get ragged and unaligned when I made small changes the the preceding code. This gets even worse in files with columns of data. And tabs were, after all, designed specifically for the purpose of aligning text. No, I think I'll stick to tabs thanks.

If you happen to be using tabwidth 8, then :set tabstop 4 will make all my files align correctly on your PC. Alternatively, you can add/remove some tabs, but I assure you it is far less effort than going through and fixing the much greater number of spaces when alignment goes wrong.

Re:Note from a VIM user... (1)

lsolano (398432) | more than 5 years ago | (#26817239)

I like vim, however, I've been using great editor for windows.

Notepad++
http://notepad-plus.sourceforge.net/uk/site.htm [sourceforge.net]

It supports everything you mentioned.

Clearly your problem ... (1)

Rumata (98457) | more than 5 years ago | (#26807471)

... is in front of the screen ;-)

Vim has THREE modes (1)

sd.fhasldff (833645) | more than 5 years ago | (#26810065)

command mode (beep constantly?)
insert mode (not sure how you are breaking things here)

and

visual mode.

Am I crazy? (5, Informative)

liebeskind (1401873) | more than 5 years ago | (#26803285)

Am I crazy - or has vim 7.2 been out for a while?
The date on the announcement is from August 8, 2009.
Also:
~$ vim --version
VIM - Vi IMproved 7.2 (2008 Aug 9, compiled Nov 11 2008 17:20:43)

Re:Am I crazy? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26803343)

Just click the link, the post dates from 9 Aug 2008

Re:Am I crazy? (2)

liebeskind (1401873) | more than 5 years ago | (#26803357)

The date on the announcement is from August 8, 2009.

Oops, I meant to say "August 9, 2008". Sorry for the self reply.

Re:Am I crazy? (5, Funny)

gardyloo (512791) | more than 5 years ago | (#26803363)

The date on the announcement is from August 8, 2009.

      Eek! The Large Hadron Collider's effects have started leaking to other slashdot dimensions!

Re:Am I crazy? (1)

dedazo (737510) | more than 5 years ago | (#26803653)

Yeah, this is way old. Except that Slashdot's search function doesn't seem to return an article on the release, so I guess you can't call it a dupe. OTOH you kind of wonder why a site like Slashdot would not publish that news to begin with. Since it's impossible to know if someone submitted it last year, we'll never know.

Re:Am I crazy? (4, Funny)

SpaceLifeForm (228190) | more than 5 years ago | (#26803785)

Smells like an EMACS conspiracy.

Re:Am I crazy? (1)

Jurily (900488) | more than 5 years ago | (#26804857)

Am I crazy - or has vim 7.2 been out for a while?

* app-editors/vim
            Latest version available: 7.2.021
            Latest version installed: 7.2
            Size of files: 9,077 kB
            Homepage: http://www.vim.org/ [vim.org]
            Description: Vim, an improved vi-style text editor
            License: vim

My Time Machine Works! (5, Funny)

Spasmodeus (940657) | more than 5 years ago | (#26803317)

I've gone back in time six months!

Re:My Time Machine Works! (1)

Tomsk70 (984457) | more than 5 years ago | (#26810701)

Yeah, who is this Obama person?

Lag Time? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26803319)

It's been out for a WHILE now!

Re:Lag Time? (0, Redundant)

ppc_digger (961188) | more than 5 years ago | (#26806563)

The editors were using emacs so it took a while to publish.

Is it April 1st already? (0, Redundant)

bulletman (254401) | more than 5 years ago | (#26803369)

I've been using this for months now.

posted by kdawson (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26803399)

hey malda, I'm sure you and your corporate overlords are trying to save money these days. Rather than posting more slashvertisements, how about firing this douchebag?

Do they have a real vi compatible mode? (1)

argent (18001) | more than 5 years ago | (#26803497)

News for the vim people, these days "vi compatible" means "nvi compatible". KTHX.

Re:Do they have a real vi compatible mode? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26803805)

What's not vi compatible with vim?

Re:Do they have a real vi compatible mode? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26804023)

Which in a slightly less ambiguous way translates into "What is it that is not vi if it not incompatible with vim?"

Re:Do they have a real vi compatible mode? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26804113)

Insert mode, the windowing system, the macro system. ...
And the goddamn color! Did we fucking ask for color!
No, we did not!!
Don't call your VIboMination vi.

Re:Do they have a real vi compatible mode? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26804335)

I'm sorry. That was me. I asked for color. My bad.

Re:Do they have a real vi compatible mode? (2, Funny)

Mister_Stoopid (1222674) | more than 5 years ago | (#26806611)

Insert mode is new in vim? How did you type new text in vi? Did you have to move the cursor and 'r'eplace each blank space with the desired character?

Re:Do they have a real vi compatible mode? (1)

argent (18001) | more than 5 years ago | (#26817835)

How did you type new text in vi?

With a paper tape punch, scissors, and masking tape, as god intended.

Re:Do they have a real vi compatible mode? (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26806707)

Launching a vi-compatible editor without arguments does NOT bring up a screen begging on behalf of starving fucking children somewhere. FUCK VIM!

From the announcement... (2, Funny)

Sponge Bath (413667) | more than 5 years ago | (#26803509)

I will not make an Amiga or OS/2 binary for Vim 7.2.

Why not? Then you would have an editor as antiquated as the OS it runs on.
Ooooh! BURRRRN!

Re:From the announcement... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26803643)

please, to be departing from my lawn, whippersnapper!

Please... (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26803827)

I work daily with humongous text files. I have found no other editor that performs as well when you work with text files that are in several gigabytes range. All the other major shell text editors cough instantly (tried for instance Emacs, it loaded one of those files for 30 minutes before I got bored of waiting) and most of the shiny new GUI editors are even worse. For instance gedit practically dies instantly on the stuff I work with.

There is a place for vi*. You use them when the tool has to work. They are pain in the ass to use, but they manage things others do not.

Re:Please... (2, Funny)

msuarezalvarez (667058) | more than 5 years ago | (#26804799)

If the files you are editing are *that* big, then a text editor is not the correct tool.

Re:Please... (4, Interesting)

Waffle Iron (339739) | more than 5 years ago | (#26805127)

If the files you are editing are *that* big, then a text editor is not the correct tool.

Ok. Let's assume that you've been given a plain text file of that size, and you need to modify something in it. What tool do you suggest?

I can think of the stock answers:

"Load it into a database" - lots of hassle and probably overkill

"Filter it with a custom script" - maybe, if you're a programmer

"sed" - could work, but why bother if vim works? Personally, I can never remember the sed syntax.

"Don't use text files that big" - Assumes facts not in evidence

Any other suggestions?

Re:Please... (-1, Troll)

msuarezalvarez (667058) | more than 5 years ago | (#26806221)

Since you did not tell me *what* it is you want to do to the file, it is simply impossible to say...

Re:Please... (3, Informative)

lewiscr (3314) | more than 5 years ago | (#26806349)

"sed" - could work, but why bother if vim works? Personally, I can never remember the sed syntax.

*sputters* You can't remember the sed syntax? It's the same as vi.

Mostly likely, if you're editting a several gig text file, you're doing bulk edits, not single edits. ala:

:%s/hamburger/cheeseburger/g

Well, here's the sed script to do that:

sed 's/hamburger/cheeseburger/g' < infile > outfile

They're so similiar, I suspect that they're related... yup. The Sed History [umich.edu] says that "Sed was first written in 1977 as a stream adaptation of the ed editor".

And since vi is just a fancy tui on top of ed, you already know sed.

Why bother? Just because vi can edit large files, it's still painfully slow. Large and/or many edits are very slow to apply and undo. The same commands executed in sed can be done order of magnitude faster. I believe (but have never taken the time to prove it) that it's related to the undo buffer. And yes, my anecdotal evidence took place on machine with enough RAM that no swapping was required for vi or sed.

Now if you want to get really productive, we can talk about taking your vi commands, wrapping them in a sed script, then running it through sed2perl. Oh the Thinks you will have Thunk.

Re:Please... (1)

nlper (638076) | more than 5 years ago | (#26810265)

"sed" - could work, but why bother if vim works? Personally, I can never remember the sed syntax.

*sputters* You can't remember the sed syntax? It's the same as vi.

Mostly likely, if you're editting a several gig text file, you're doing bulk edits, not single edits. ala:

:%s/hamburger/cheeseburger/g

A perfectly good point, unfortunately marred by the remarks that follow.

Mostly likely, if you're editting a several gig text file, you're doing bulk edits, not single edits.

You're assuming conditions not previously specified. What if the poster only changes hamburger to cheeseburger depending on the values of relish and pickle on nearby lines? Are you one of those manly men who use sed to repair mismatched braces in your source files?

My point being that if the previous posters in the subthread find vim satisfactory for the problems they're thinking of, it might be because they understand their typical problems better than you do.

And since vi is just a fancy tui on top of ed, you already know sed.

Why bother? Just because vi can edit large files, it's still painfully slow. Large and/or many edits are very slow to apply and undo. The same commands executed in sed can be done order of magnitude faster.

Yes, if they're bulk edits. But it depends on the context. The last time I looked through the sed man pages I missed the part that covered "query changes" and "undo".

Finally, your experiences with the performance of vi are pretty much irrelevant to a thread on vim. I just used vim on a 3.1 GB text file this evening in a test. Loading and saving the file took a while, but once the file had loaded moving from one end to another, searching for strings, making edits, etc. were pretty damn fast. Not appreciably slower than I've experienced with 100k text files, in other words.

Tyler

Re:Please... (1)

berend botje (1401731) | more than 5 years ago | (#26810453)



As long as the fileformat is somewhat sane, this isn't at all difficult. To replace hamburger with cheeseburger between "two lines down from pickles=yes" and "three lines above the next occurrence of relish=no":

/pickles=yes/+2,/relish=no/-3s/hamburger/cheeseburger/g

You can get quite funky as those two range markers are fully regexp-aware, of course!

Re:Please... (1)

lewiscr (3314) | more than 5 years ago | (#26817397)

vi are pretty much irrelevant to a thread on vim

Sorry, I'm on one of those platforms that replaced vi with vim years ago. I incorrectly use them interchangably. Please substitute all references of vi in my previous post with vim.

I have not benchmarked vi in this area for at least 6 years, so I won't talk about vi.

because they understand their typical problems better than you do

Very likely. I can only offer my own experience. When I open a large file in vim, I'll usually wait a few seconds and then start writing a sed, awk, or perl script to accomplish the same goal. I'll drop awk and perl for the rest of the discussion, because they do not have a very shallow learning curve that sed has for an existing vi/vim user.

I find that I can usually write the sed scripts and execute them before my vim edits are complete. Sometimes before vim finishes loading. I give high priority to vim and only write the sed commands while vim is processing. If vim finishes first, I've lost nothing by writing the sed script. If sed finishes first, I saved time.

I don't write one monolithic sed script. I belive I've written a .sed file once. Most of the time, I just run a couple sed -i.bak -e 'command1' -e 'command2' -e 'command3' file commands in quick succession.

Loading and saving the file took a while, but once the file had loaded moving from one end to another, searching for strings, making edits, etc. were pretty damn fast.

I'm with you until the making edits. It all depends on what edits your trying to do. Which the original poster did not specify.

Some counter examples:

Try deleting the 2nd half of your 3.1GB file. In vim, I'd move halfway down, and hit 'dG'. And wait. I can accomplish this quite a bit faster using several different CLI tools, one of which is sed. I've done this many times, usually when I'm interested in a particualr time range from a log file.

If I want to do my original example of vim's :%s/hamburger/cheeseburger/g. After I ran the command, I noticed that hamburger appears on pretty much every line in my 3.1GB file (think 'Mozilla' in an apache access_log). In this case, the sed script will be way faster. I can't quantify that, because I've never waited for vim to complete. I always end up kill -9'ing vim because Ctrl-C takes too long to abort.

I'm not saying that sed is perfect for every job. The original poster said that vim is the only tool he has that works. I'm giving him a bigger toolbox so he can pick the tool he wants to use.

More crazy editor choices... (1)

zippthorne (748122) | more than 5 years ago | (#26807881)

Depending on what you need to replace, how large the file is, and how many files you need to change, dd might be your "editor" of choice. Although IANA('nix pro), so I'm not sure it's possible to get dd to just overwrite a few bytes in the middle of a file without setting up a loopback device.

Hmm..

A quick skim through the shred man page suggests it might be useful if the bits you want to overwrite are at the begining of the file...

It always bothered me that Perl's "in place" option actually is nothing of the sort.

Re:Please... (1)

Nutria (679911) | more than 5 years ago | (#26805695)

I work daily with humongous text files. I have found no other editor that performs as well when you work with text files that are in several gigabytes range.

Not in Debian (or maybe all of Linux?) it doesn't.

http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=139510 [debian.org]

This bug is 7 years old, and a variant of it still exists.

Re:Please... (1)

nlper (638076) | more than 5 years ago | (#26810457)

I work daily with humongous text files. I have found no other editor that performs as well when you work with text files that are in several gigabytes range.

Not in Debian (or maybe all of Linux?) it doesn't.

Sorry, I view that link you gave as less of a bug report than a Twit Alert. Seriously, when was the last time you ran across a 2.7 GB file of nulls and thought of it as a text file to be edited?

The relevant section of the Vim docs [vim.org] explains that the maximum length of a line and the maximum number of lines per file depends on the local size of long integers, typically 32 bits. So if your box is limited to 2G lines per file and 2GB per line, is it any wonder there's an error message upon encountering 2.7 GB of nulls?

This evening I edited a 3.1 GB text file (generated from the dictionaries on my Ubuntu 8.04.2, AKA Debian Linux box) without any problems at all. 334M lines of text, averaging what, 9 characters per line? So to run into vim's limit I'd have to be editing close to 20 GB of dictionary words. Or for 90-character log file line lengths, somewhere in the vicinity of 200 GB of text.

So. no, I don't think that special case of a null file warrants real-world concern.

Tyler

Re:Please... (3, Interesting)

Mad Merlin (837387) | more than 5 years ago | (#26806395)

There is a place for vi*. You use them when the tool has to work. They are pain in the ass to use, but they manage things others do not.

Not really, I use Vim in preference to every other editor. Once you're used to Vim you can edit at least 10x faster than with an "easy" GUI editor.

Re:Please... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26810099)

Agree, Vi best editor by far, but steep learning curve.

Which editor doesnt require a mouse?
So quick. Also,most Vi users dont know it has ability to interact with command line, exposing unlimited amount of self written macros.

Vi good, but Im getting lazy in my old age

Re:Please... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26810199)

> Which editor doesnt require a mouse?

Notepad. That you don't know how to use it is another matter.

Re:Please... (1)

swarsron (612788) | more than 5 years ago | (#26810405)

AOL. Vim is *really* powerfull if you know how to handle it. For example lets asume you download some show and want to have sane filenames. So i go to the directory of the show every few months and make a 'ls -1 > out; vim out'. In my vimrc i have this: let @m="0v$hyimv \"^[A\" \"\"^[hp0j"

With this i press @m and transform a line from

The.Daily.Show.2009.02.04.PDTV.XviD-aAF.[VTV].avi to

mv "The.Daily.Show.2009.02.04.PDTV.XviD-aAF.[VTV].avi" "The.Daily.Show.2009.02.04.PDTV.XviD-aAF.[VTV].avi"
(usually something like 1000@m to cover the whole file).
Then i record a macro which edits the last part of the mv command and use it on all lines with similar filenames (if you know what to use you can usually cover even slightly different filenames with the same macro) and save the file, execute it and voila, nice filenames.

It's a trivial example but vim makes stuff like that very easy because you have everything you need to do that already at your fingertips

Re:Please... (1)

Cyberax (705495) | more than 5 years ago | (#26810851)

Bullshit.

It may be true for extremely large files, but is false for almost everything else.

For example, VisualStudio has almost all advanced features of vim. Like clipboard ring, vertical blocks, bookmarks, automatic positioning, etc.

Re:Please... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26807553)

vedit works well on large files...
http://www.vedit.com/ [vedit.com]

Re:Please... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26808039)

Have you tried textedit from XView Toolkit? It used to load large files pretty fast for me.

Re:From the announcement... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26806381)

Not just AS antiquated, but MORE SO.

Emacs! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26803543)

Who uses Vim anyway? Emacs is way better!

I'M A KOREAN (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26803553)

I'M A KOREAN

        SON OF A BITCH AMERICAN

        AMERICAN IS PIG

        DO YOU WANT A HAMBURGER?

        DO YOU WANT A PIZZA?

        AMERICAN IS PIG DISGUSTING

        GEORGE WALKER BUSH IS A MURDERER

        FUCKING U.S.A

:q! (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26803585)

Dude, wtf? I'm on Vim 7.2 for months now....

have you guys heard about this? (5, Funny)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 5 years ago | (#26803605)

Hey! Check out this post I came across while browsing usenet. Have any of you heard anything about this? Sounds like it might be kinda cool.

From: torvalds@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Linus Benedict Torvalds)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: Free minix-like kernel sources for 386-AT
Keywords: 386, preliminary version
Message-ID:
Date: 5 Oct 91 05:41:06 GMT
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 55

Do you pine for the nice days of minix-1.1, when men were men and wrote
their own device drivers? Are you without a nice project and just dying
to cut your teeth on a OS you can try to modify for your needs? Are you
finding it frustrating when everything works on minix? No more all-
nighters to get a nifty program working? Then this post might be just
for you :-)

As I mentioned a month(?) ago, I'm working on a free version of a
minix-lookalike for AT-386 computers. It has finally reached the stage
where it's even usable (though may not be depending on what you want),
and I am willing to put out the sources for wider distribution. It is
just version 0.02 (+1 (very small) patch already), but I've successfully
run bash/gcc/gnu-make/gnu-sed/compress etc under it.

Sources for this pet project of mine can be found at nic.funet.fi
(128.214.6.100) in the directory /pub/OS/Linux. The directory also
contains some README-file and a couple of binaries to work under linux
(bash, update and gcc, what more can you ask for :-). Full kernel
source is provided, as no minix code has been used. Library sources are
only partially free, so that cannot be distributed currently. The
system is able to compile "as-is" and has been known to work. Heh.
Sources to the binaries (bash and gcc) can be found at the same place in /pub/gnu.

ALERT! WARNING! NOTE! These sources still need minix-386 to be compiled
(and gcc-1.40, possibly 1.37.1, haven't tested), and you need minix to
set it up if you want to run it, so it is not yet a standalone system
for those of you without minix. I'm working on it. You also need to be
something of a hacker to set it up (?), so for those hoping for an
alternative to minix-386, please ignore me. It is currently meant for
hackers interested in operating systems and 386's with access to minix.

The system needs an AT-compatible harddisk (IDE is fine) and EGA/VGA. If
you are still interested, please ftp the README/RELNOTES, and/or mail me
for additional info.

I can (well, almost) hear you asking yourselves "why?". Hurd will be
out in a year (or two, or next month, who knows), and I've already got
minix. This is a program for hackers by a hacker. I've enjouyed doing
it, and somebody might enjoy looking at it and even modifying it for
their own needs. It is still small enough to understand, use and
modify, and I'm looking forward to any comments you might have.

I'm also interested in hearing from anybody who has written any of the
utilities/library functions for minix. If your efforts are freely
distributable (under copyright or even public domain), I'd like to hear
from you, so I can add them to the system. I'm using Earl Chews estdio
right now (thanks for a nice and working system Earl), and similar works
will be very wellcome. Your (C)'s will of course be left intact. Drop me
a line if you are willing to let me use your code.

                Linus

PS. to PHIL NELSON! I'm unable to get through to you, and keep getting
"forward error - strawberry unknown domain" or something.

Re:have you guys heard about this? (2, Funny)

oldspewey (1303305) | more than 5 years ago | (#26803721)

That is some cutting-edge stuff right there.

Re:have you guys heard about this? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26804033)

I predict that within the year all desktops will run be running this amazing, new technology!

Re:have you guys heard about this? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26804751)

Mark my words, 1991 will be the year of the Linux desktop.

Re:have you guys heard about this? (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 5 years ago | (#26805603)

I predict that within the year all desktops will run be running this amazing, new technology!

Indeed; who knows, it may even kill OS/2!

Re:have you guys heard about this? (1)

omar.sahal (687649) | more than 5 years ago | (#26815963)

Shut up!!!! the hurd will wipe the floor with this. Keith Bostic is also writing BSD for intel 386, a little bird is telling me.

Re:have you guys heard about this? (5, Funny)

Abreu (173023) | more than 5 years ago | (#26803787)

I can (well, almost) hear you asking yourselves "why?". Hurd will be out in a year (or two, or next month, who knows), and I've already got minix.

Everytime I see this, I don't know whenever I want to laugh or cry...

Re:have you guys heard about this? (5, Funny)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 5 years ago | (#26803913)

That's the beautiful thing about it. It's just as true today as it was 18 years ago.

Re:have you guys heard about this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26804397)

No no, with at least two competing kernels for the next generation of Hurd vaporware (Viengoos and Coyotos), we're *at least* several years away from an actual public release.

The cool thing, though, is that capabilities mean a whole new, vastly better security model than the standard broad strokes and ugly hacks of *nix. This enables and implies all sorts of cool things, the simplest example being easy sandboxing of your web browser. And web server. Hurd (or something like it) really is the future of open source OSes. But it'll be in the future for a long while yet.

Re:have you guys heard about this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26805433)

You mean Hurd is the future of kernels for Free operating systems. /rmsmode

Re:have you guys heard about this? (1)

thewils (463314) | more than 5 years ago | (#26804339)

Forget it. It'll never catch on. Get back to your 8-Track.

Re:have you guys heard about this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26804747)

"I can (well, almost) hear you asking yourselves "why?". Hurd will be
out in a year (or two, or next month, who knows)
, and I've already got
minix. "

Wow.....

Re:have you guys heard about this? (1)

setagllib (753300) | more than 5 years ago | (#26806005)

Well to be fair, it's precisely that announcement which killed Hurd. That and gross mismanagement. But I still like to imagine that it's Linus himself who spared us from Hurd by accidentally killing it with a one-man 0.1 release.

Re:have you guys heard about this? (1)

isorox (205688) | more than 5 years ago | (#26809535)

PS. to PHIL NELSON! I'm unable to get through to you, and keep getting
"forward error - strawberry unknown domain" or something.

I think this is the greatest line to ever be tagged on to an historical announcement.

Is it Qedit yet? (-1, Offtopic)

Tumbleweed (3706) | more than 5 years ago | (#26803863)

If not, I'm not interested.

Re:Is it Qedit yet? (0, Troll)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 5 years ago | (#26804277)

No, but this is [semware.com] . IOW, if you want Qedit, you know where to find it. :)

wtf... (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26803869)

uh.

we learned one thing from this story posting... (4, Funny)

Leto-II (1509) | more than 5 years ago | (#26804321)

We now know for sure kdawson is not a Vim user.

Really not necessary (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26804349)

I guess kdawson just wanted to make things perfectly clear, in case anyone had the misconception that he actually bothered to read submissions before posting them.

You really don't have to make a special effort like this, kdawson, we all know that you don't.

Vim's gvim frontend (1)

FudRucker (866063) | more than 5 years ago | (#26804807)

i sure wish the vim developers would fix that buggy gtk2 frontend, i get artifacts in the menus and the buffer loses text...

Midnight Commander's built in editor (mcedit) is good enough for me...

Re:Vim's gvim frontend (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26805803)

I think it's close to dead. I used it for a couple of weeks and found a bug (and sent a patch), it was not a hidden bug, it was totally obvious, which leads me to believe it isn't used much. I'd rather have a kpart, but I guess it's not very likely due to C vs C++

Re:Vim's gvim frontend (1)

Nimey (114278) | more than 5 years ago | (#26806209)

There was a kvim at one time; don't know what happened to it.

floating point? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26807467)

You mean, like emacs has supported in elisp for half of forever now?

Oh, and the lovely captcha: "reinvent" :D

Re:floating point? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26807595)

Doh! Slashdot ate my ("Ducks!") in brackets, making that sound more like flamebait than I meant.

Great News! (4, Funny)

PPH (736903) | more than 5 years ago | (#26807571)

I've been waitti^H^H damn! ^H^H ^Q ^[ .... :w :q :wq :wq! ^d
exit X Q ^C ^? :quitbye CtrlAltDel ~~q :~q logout save/quit :!QUIT
^[zz ^[ZZZZZZ ^H man vi ^@ ^L ^[c ^# ^E ^X ^I ^T ? help helpquit ^D
man quit ^C ^c ?Quit ?q CtrlShftDel "Hey, what does this button d..."

Vim? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26812031)

USE EMACS!!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>