[arch-general] New vi/vim/gvim in testing requires intervention
dpmcgee at gmail.com
Tue May 12 08:25:17 EDT 2009
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 2:19 AM, Tobias Kieslich <tobias at justdreams.de> wrote:
> On Tue, 12 May 2009, Magnus Therning wrote:
>>>> And a quick guess, it looks like the new vim package puts its colors here:
>>>> Any reason the old /usr/share/vim/ shouldn't be on the default runtimepath?
>> Looking at other distros it seems using /usr/share/vim/vimX is the place
>> for system-wide configurations. Not saying that's right or wrong.
> Well, I tied up quite a few requests into the new vim packages. Becuase
> we serve the runtime files with one package(vim) and have other
> packages(gvim) depend on it, I used to set the runtime path explicitely.
> Users told me that causes vim to search always in two pathes(the
> explicite one AND the default one). Hence I started toi stick with the
> default path, which is /usr/share/vim/vimxy.
> That means all plugins need to be rebuild and some users that set fixed
> pathes in .vimrc will have to adjust.
Looks like we have a new rebuild list then:
$ pacman -Sqs vim-
Why the heck gvim and vimpager showed up in there I'm not sure, but
the above plugin packages probably all use the default location. We
should additionally make sure they depend on 'vim' and not 'vi', as I
rebuilt two or three plugins already that made the assumption they
were one and the same.
More information about the arch-general