[arch-dev-public] status of vi/vim in testing

Aaron Griffin aaronmgriffin at gmail.com
Thu Jun 18 12:15:29 EDT 2009

On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Tobias Kieslich<tobias at 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)

This rigmarole is getting to be a huge headache - especially
considering that gvim in testing needs a rebuild due to ruby still...

More information about the arch-dev-public mailing list