On 21 April 2015 at 22:32, Evangelos Foutras <[email protected]> wrote: > On 21/04/15 16:27, Allan McRae wrote: >> What happened to adding a symlink? Now there is no "vi" in base, many >> packages there are broken out of the box - sudo (visudo), bash >> (bashbug), less (when pressing v). There is bound to be more... >> >> Or are we having all those packages depend on vim? > > td;dr: No symlink; instead, let's configure those programs to use nano. > > During the previous discussion, Alexander posted a list of applications > that depend on vi. [1] > > Based on that list, the following packages can be configured at compile > time to use an editor other than vi: > > sudo less util-linux shadow > > It's not mentioned on the list, but cronie also accepts a ./configure > flag to set the default editor. > > The remaining use cases seem small enough that relying on VISUAL/EDITOR > for those doesn't sound too bad. > > The real question is, what do we set the default editor to; nano (in > [core] and part of the base group so it gets installed by default) or > vim (highly preferred choice for some people, but not in [core])? > > What we are looking for here is a sane default, so nano seems like the > better choice. If nobody complains too loudly, I'll switch sudo, less, > util-linux, shadow and cronie to use nano by default in a couple of days. > > [1] > https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/2013-January/024357.html
As long as the EDITOR variable is supported by those programs, maybe yes. But I don't think creating a symlink *anyway* and make vim provide vi is inappropriate. J. Leclanche
