[arch-dev-public] [signoff] vi-050325-3 (1 for each arch)
Please signoff 1 for each arch. This is just packaging cleanup, and should have no subtantive impact on the functioning of vi. Mostly just looking for an extra sanity check here, nothing specific to test. See FS#18215 for details. Highlights: * removed obsolete gcc bug workaround portion of du.patch, renamed to navkeys.patch * used make options rather than manual means of configuration wherever possible - P
On 03/07/2010 02:41 PM, Paul Mattal wrote:
Please signoff 1 for each arch.
This is just packaging cleanup, and should have no subtantive impact on the functioning of vi. Mostly just looking for an extra sanity check here, nothing specific to test.
See FS#18215 for details. Highlights:
* removed obsolete gcc bug workaround portion of du.patch, renamed to navkeys.patch * used make options rather than manual means of configuration wherever possible
Anyone? Still need 1 signoff for each. Install vi, make sure you can still use it to edit stuff. Here's the diff on the PKGBUILD cleanup, if you wish to examine: http://repos.archlinux.org/wsvn/packages/vi/trunk/PKGBUILD?op=diff&rev=0 - P
Am 07.03.2010 20:41, schrieb Paul Mattal:
Please signoff 1 for each arch.
This is just packaging cleanup, and should have no subtantive impact on the functioning of vi. Mostly just looking for an extra sanity check here, nothing specific to test.
See FS#18215 for details. Highlights:
* removed obsolete gcc bug workaround portion of du.patch, renamed to navkeys.patch * used make options rather than manual means of configuration wherever possible
- P
I used this, but when I use the arrow keys while in insert mode, it prints "D" instead of moving around. Is that normal?
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 3:28 PM, Thomas Bächler <thomas@archlinux.org> wrote:
Am 07.03.2010 20:41, schrieb Paul Mattal:
Please signoff 1 for each arch.
This is just packaging cleanup, and should have no subtantive impact on the functioning of vi. Mostly just looking for an extra sanity check here, nothing specific to test.
See FS#18215 for details. Highlights:
* removed obsolete gcc bug workaround portion of du.patch, renamed to navkeys.patch * used make options rather than manual means of configuration wherever possible
- P
I used this, but when I use the arrow keys while in insert mode, it prints "D" instead of moving around. Is that normal?
That's the way crappy vi's behave on all flavor of unicies. It's annoying as hell. What is this "navkeys" patch? It appears to add support for home/end/pgup/pgdn. While I'm not a huge fan of that (patching and all), broken keys in shitty vi's is one of my biggest annoyances (at work I regularly use 5-10 machines with varying vi versions and 90% are just broken). If we're already patching the navkeys in vi and are ok with that, why not add arrow keys in there too?
On 03/12/2010 05:17 PM, Aaron Griffin wrote:
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 3:28 PM, Thomas Bächler<thomas@archlinux.org> wrote:
Am 07.03.2010 20:41, schrieb Paul Mattal:
Please signoff 1 for each arch.
This is just packaging cleanup, and should have no subtantive impact on the functioning of vi. Mostly just looking for an extra sanity check here, nothing specific to test.
See FS#18215 for details. Highlights:
* removed obsolete gcc bug workaround portion of du.patch, renamed to navkeys.patch * used make options rather than manual means of configuration wherever possible
- P
I used this, but when I use the arrow keys while in insert mode, it prints "D" instead of moving around. Is that normal?
That's the way crappy vi's behave on all flavor of unicies. It's annoying as hell.
What is this "navkeys" patch? It appears to add support for home/end/pgup/pgdn. While I'm not a huge fan of that (patching and all), broken keys in shitty vi's is one of my biggest annoyances (at work I regularly use 5-10 machines with varying vi versions and 90% are just broken).
If we're already patching the navkeys in vi and are ok with that, why not add arrow keys in there too?
Nothing has changed here in our patching of the navkeys, just in the name of the patch. We had a patch before named du.patch, which included the navkeys patch and another patch for a bug in gcc (which has since become unnecessary). This "new" patch is just the navkeys part of the du.patch (which was named after the patch author's initials) renamed to navkeys.patch. I'm not in favor of changing the navkeys behavior away from what it has been without some input from Tobias, the maintainer, who may know the history and reasoning here. Unless there is some regression, can we get some signoffs for this cleanup before moving on to changing other things in the package? - P
On 13/03/10 07:28, Thomas Bächler wrote:
Am 07.03.2010 20:41, schrieb Paul Mattal:
Please signoff 1 for each arch.
This is just packaging cleanup, and should have no subtantive impact on the functioning of vi. Mostly just looking for an extra sanity check here, nothing specific to test.
See FS#18215 for details. Highlights:
* removed obsolete gcc bug workaround portion of du.patch, renamed to navkeys.patch * used make options rather than manual means of configuration wherever possible
- P
I used this, but when I use the arrow keys while in insert mode, it prints "D" instead of moving around. Is that normal?
That is how it is... http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/17734 Signoff both. Allan
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 4:19 PM, Allan McRae <allan@archlinux.org> wrote:
On 13/03/10 07:28, Thomas Bächler wrote:
Am 07.03.2010 20:41, schrieb Paul Mattal:
Please signoff 1 for each arch.
This is just packaging cleanup, and should have no subtantive impact on the functioning of vi. Mostly just looking for an extra sanity check here, nothing specific to test.
See FS#18215 for details. Highlights:
* removed obsolete gcc bug workaround portion of du.patch, renamed to navkeys.patch * used make options rather than manual means of configuration wherever possible
- P
I used this, but when I use the arrow keys while in insert mode, it prints "D" instead of moving around. Is that normal?
That is how it is... http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/17734
Honest question though: we already have a "navkeys" patch to support Home/End/PgUp/PgDn. How is that any different? We should pick one side of this: either fix all the keys, or none
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 16:21:19 -0600 Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 4:19 PM, Allan McRae <allan@archlinux.org> wrote:
That is how it is... http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/17734
Honest question though: we already have a "navkeys" patch to support Home/End/PgUp/PgDn. How is that any different?
We should pick one side of this: either fix all the keys, or none
"fix" ? like the ticket says, that's the way how vi (or whichever upstream version we use) is _meant_ to behave. I can understand one not liking the behavior, but it just seems to be how it's intended. Dieter
participants (5)
-
Aaron Griffin
-
Allan McRae
-
Dieter Plaetinck
-
Paul Mattal
-
Thomas Bächler