[arch-general] New vi/vim/gvim in testing requires intervention

tobias at justdreams.de tobias at justdreams.de
Wed May 6 13:46:12 EDT 2009


that can be done, sure, however I don't like the idea of having an  
extra package conflict with a core one.
We could name the package nvi, call the binaries nvi and provide a  
symlink that gets replace on installing vim but all this symlinking  
stuff has proved itself to be error prone.

- T

Quoting Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com>:

> On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 12:49 PM, Thomas Bohn <thomas at bohnomat.de> wrote:
>> On 2009-05-05 19:20 +0200, tobias at justdreams.de wrote:
>>> the current vi package is actually nvi, the purpose of that was to have a
>>> smaller package for core that also would not stall any updates of
>>> vim/gvim while vi sits in testing.
>> I know that. That is why I'm asking. Either nvi or Vim. Both makes it
>> complex.
>>> Th vim package is not uglier then it used to be before,
> Actually, I don't see a big problem with vim having provides/conflicts
> with vi, so that it will completely supplant it. That way we also
> cover the users who USE and EXPECT 'vim' but still type 'vi' (sigh)

More information about the arch-general mailing list