Re: New virtual package names.
dwarf@polaris.net (Dale Scheetz) wrote on 27.08.96 in <[🔎] Pine.LNX.3.94.960827144742.3556A-100000@dwarf.polaris.net>:
> No, I am concerned about programs that might use $EDITOR as the means to
> providing an editor. Pine, for instance, can be configured to call an
> editor under certain circumstances. If no editor is available (due to
> being removed) then, as we all know, pine will flash an error message for
> all of 1/20th of a second and then stare at you. Emacs also has conditions
> where it calls an outside editor, and I'm sure that there are others.
> Problems of this type, caused by the lack of an editor will appear to be
> bugs in other software. This is something to be avoided, in my estimation.
It seems there are several problems here:
1. Having an editor in the base system by default.
2. Keeping a system from becoming editorless.
3. Ensuring that packages needing an editor have one.
Now, (1) needs no special mechanism; just put ae into the base system and
forget about it.
(2) is not really needed; an editor is not essential to package
installation.
(3), on the other hand, would certainly benefit from an "editor" virtual
package.
So, the important question boils down to "how important is (3)". What will
it do for us to implement this?
As Dale said, it will keep some annoying problems from happening if
someone deinstalls every editor.
Or will it?
Just what does, say, pine do, if we have all the editors installed, and
$EDITOR is set to /this/doesnt/exist ?
Two possibilities:
a. It acts just like there is no editor. Oops, the virtual package doesn't
help.
b. It falls back to a specific editor. Then we'd need that one, not any
one, and again the virtual package doesn't help.
So, no joy here.
All we get is that, when all editors are removed, installing - say - pine
will get us to install an editor.
Personally, I don't think that's worth it.
Of course, the update-alternatives thing with an "editor" program might do
more for us, if we configure that as fallback. However, that is a lot more
work.
My vote would be for dropping the idea (and the "essential" flag).
MfG Kai
Reply to: