Em 29-07-2013 03:30, Matt Burgess escreveu: > On Sun, 2013-07-28 at 20:43 -0300, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: > >> But I have to say that I like vim/gvim, only >> dislike the way it is maintained, displaying a *new version with x.y.z* >> in the site, but only providing an original version x.y tar ball that >> can be several years old and individual 1 to z patches. This is >> misleading, for that, LFS/BLFS is always behind, Fedora and Arch are >> sometimes years ahead of us, thousands of patches ahead. > > It is my understanding that those 'patches' simply represent individual > commits against Vim's equivalent of 'svn trunk' or 'cvs head' or 'git > master' - i.e. by applying the patches we'd effectively be running the > latest development version. When this was pointed out to us, as it's a > bit of an odd use of the word 'patch' IMO, we decided to roll back to > the 'stock' 7.3 version with no patches applied.
Thanks, Matt. So, I understand that instead of using a patch I could use the development. That is better, just for me. Thanks for the info. Just tried it. > Given that, I'm really > not that bothered about being years/thousands of patches behind other > distributions. I understand this. This time, I was just pointing that at the site, information is misleading. Thus, in more kind words (sorry for the rash ones above), there will be large differences, according to the interpretation. It seems that src mercurial directory has all the code, and runtime would be up to date, only needing to install, after two directories removed, if following the book. They seem to say everybody should use the patches, latest is marked as current, but they do not produce a latest tarball, just the unpatched one: Top of the site: "Vim 7.4a.047 is the *current version*" Here, they clearly say this is "current version", not development. But is it current or development version? In the same page, they also have: "Vim 7.4 beta testing has started", which seems to be development. Later, talking about Download and Install: "The preferred way is to use Mercurial. You can easily get the latest version with all the patches, or go back to an older version if you need to." and in another place: "Using Mercurial This is the simplest and most efficient way to obtain the latest version, including all patches. This requires the "hg" command." I understand that, in the books, development versions are avoided, although not always, just remember mplayer, some time ago. I also understand that no one here (me included) wants the books to include mercurial as required for vim or host system requirements. Perhaps, I will stop updating vim, but when installing gvim, use development, for new LFS/BLFS system builds. Thank you for your time, Matt. -- []s, Fernando -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
