debian/control cleanup

Stefano Zacchiroli zack at
Fri Mar 24 18:57:56 UTC 2006

On Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 01:25:30PM -0500, James Vega wrote:
> 1) vim-doc is in Section: editors.  Should that be doc? Linda suggests

Agreed, I vote for Section: doc.

> 2) The vim package Provides/Replaces/Conflicts with vim-rt.  I don't see

vim-rt is an ages-old name for vim-runtime. Since that package does not
exists in sarge anylonger we can safely remove it. Please go ahead.

> 3) vim-common Recommends 'vim | vim-tiny'.  Would it make more sense to
>    have it Recommend all of the vim variants and for vim-gui-common to
>    only Recommend the gui variants?

I remember I implemented that change in the past, before vim-gui-common
existed, but either I never committed it or it get lost during some
change ... Another way to say that I agree :-)
I'm assuming that with "all of the vim variants" you mean "|"-separated
list of them.

BTW, I don't know how aptitude threat the order in the Recommend field.
It if care about it, I would go for the same order we use in the
alternatives priority (i.e. more featureful versions of vim later).

> I've fixed a lot of the alternatives problems I mentioned in my
> previous email.  Once I get that done, I'll start backporting the
> changes to our vim6 package.

Could you please briefly comment on how you solved the alternatives


Stefano Zacchiroli -*- Computer Science PhD student @ Uny Bologna, Italy
zack@{,,} -%-
If there's any real truth it's that the entire multidimensional infinity
of the Universe is almost certainly being run by a bunch of maniacs. -!-
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url :

More information about the pkg-vim-maintainers mailing list