[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: update-alternatives priorities for editors



Adam Heath wrote:
> /usr/bin/vi should be an alternative for vi-compatible editors.
> 
> /usr/bin/vi should then be an alternative that is hooked into /usr/bin/editor.

But, but, but...  How does it work if /usr/bin/vi is an alternative
hooked into /usr/bin/editor?  What package would own that hook?  Just
speaking academically since I am really not proposing we change this,
would there need to be an vi-editor meta package just for the second
level of indirection?  And a similar emacs-editor meta package for
emacs.  And so on for each editor?  I think this is too much.

> Same for emacs.

Agreed on the basis of symmetry.  (And I am an emacs user.)  But from
a pragmatic standpoint I think editor should be something for the
untrained masses.

Bob

Attachment: pgp4226Yf8rdf.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: