On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 12:15 PM, Aaron Griffin<aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Tobias Kieslich<tobias@justdreams.de> wrote:
Hiya,
my main gripe with nvi is the not missing bad badly broken support for unicode stuff. I didn't have time to check out how and if other distros deal with it. However I'm all for keeping vim out of core. about the renaming, I couldn't care less. But the main point is that LSB expects a vi. A binary name that is. And that's why I'm perfectly fine with keeping the package name. Nvi by default installes itself as vi.
I have a few more changes for vim/gvim which I will get up this week.
So all this vi/vim/gvim hassle is really because we want to save some package size and share data between packages.
Why not: vi: minimal vim build vim: replaces=(vi) provides=(vi) gvim: replaces=(vi vim) provides=(vi vim)
I think you meant conflicts instead of replaces.
This rigmarole is getting to be a huge headache - especially considering that gvim in testing needs a rebuild due to ruby still...