On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 10:42:26PM -0300, Maximiliano Curia wrote: > On Sunday 21 May 2006 16:31, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > > You would end up with nvi or nano as editors, since they are installed by > > > default. Probably more as viewer and so on. > > > Which is bad why? > > What I meant was that you would have a high number of installations for the > packages that are installed by default in a normal installation, and that is > not an objective way of getting information.
Again, this is why I didn't suggest to use the by_inst numbers, but rather the by_vote numbers. The former count the number of installations; the latter count the actual _use_ of a binary. If you have nano installed on your system but never actually use it, that won't move it up in the vote. If you have a look at the order of the by_vote numbers for editors, you'll see that vim, not nvi or nano, is at the top. -- Fun will now commence -- Seven Of Nine, "Ashes to Ashes", stardate 53679.4 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
