Bug 10882

Summary: unable to execute "vi" from inside "more"
Product: [Retired] Red Hat Linux Reporter: radvany
Component: util-linuxAssignee: Bernhard Rosenkraenzer <bero>
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE QA Contact:
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: 6.2CC: radvany
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: i386   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2000-04-18 21:56:49 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description radvany 2000-04-17 23:48:45 UTC 
The component "more" was not available in the drop down list for Red Hat
Linux.  Please add it so that this report will be valid, as it does not
pertain to "less".

While using "more" to view the contents of a text file, pressing "v" is
supposed to spawn "vi" to edit the file you are viewing.  This worked until
I upgraded redhat to version 6.2 (Zoot).  Now when I attempt to vi from
inside more I will get errors such as:

vi +11 majordomo.cfexec failed
vi +11 aliasesexec failed
vi +0 Logexec failed
vi +0 autobounce.cfexec failed
vi +11 autobounceexec failed
vi +11 old.aliasesexec failed

I do not recall this funtionality being available in "less" previously, but
it does work in (Zoot).  Using "vi" directly against any of these files
also worked flawlessly.  The filenames used can be extracted by removing
the "exec" suffix in column 3.  Apparently, even the error message is
broken, by not providing a space between the filename and "exec failed"
portions of the error. (or this could be a hint of the problem itself)
Comment 1 Anonymous 2000-04-18 21:56:59 UTC 
The man page on more explains that this version expects vi to live in /usr/bin
rather than just bin.  Creating a link to /bin/vi in /usr/bin or linking
/usr/bin/vim to /usr/bin/vi seems to "fix" the problem for now.
Comment 2 Bernhard Rosenkraenzer 2000-06-23 12:14:13 UTC 
The right component for this bug is util-linux - try "rpm -qf `which more`".

I'm fixing it now.