[7400] in SIPB bug reports
Re: vim is not stripped
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Brad Thompson)
Wed Oct 20 13:20:28 1999
Message-Id: <199910201719.NAA20622@potato.mit.edu>
To: John Hawkinson <jhawk@MIT.EDU>
Cc: bug-sipb@MIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 20 Oct 1999 13:03:35 EDT."
<199910201703.NAA16835@contents-vnder-pressvre.mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 13:19:03 -0400
From: Brad Thompson <yak@MIT.EDU>
> I think it's very dangerous to start installing stripped binaries.
> Certainly if we do that, we should endeavor to installed a vim.unstripped
> binary in the locker as well for debugging purposes. Hopefully they
> would not get out of sync.
The specific reason that vim is installed unstripped is that the first time
I installed it, there were problems that were hard to debug because we
didn't have symbols. The back of the envelope that I used when installing
the current binary suggested something equivalent to the results you got.
> It does seem like something is terribly wrong here, if it takes
> 9 seconds to start what should be the trivial and fast editor. Even
> in the cache it is slow, though:
Vim's startup time is not that bad in the cache, but vim is infected
with a terminal case of featuritis. It's only a matter of time before
it has an emacs emulation mode. nvi is better if you care about the
extra .3sec startup time.
yak
