On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 03:09:38PM -0700, Dan Price wrote: > Why is that? Because vim and gvim are the same binaries? Must that > be the case? That is to say, could gvim be done as later work and > simply be a separate binary which has as a dependency the non-gui > vim package?
Unfortunately, not the way it's currently architected, no (hence my comment about making it "dynamic"). Running "gvim" isn't the only way to get the gui. You can also run "vim -g" (which could reasonably easily be changed to re-exec gvim), but you can also type ":gui" from the console version, which will then pop up an X window with the current vim session inside it, and terminate the console version. Having that functionality available means it all needs to be part of the same wad. What I'd love is that there could be a gui_gtk.so that vim could load at the appropriate point, but it doesn't work that way. > So how do other unix-like OS's cope with this issue? I don't know offhand. I don't have recent experience with anything but gentoo linux, which simply allows you to build vim with or without its gui interface. If folks like Redhat and Ubuntu simply have two different binaries, and vim -g or vim -c :gui fail, is that acceptable for us, or make it a requirement that we do the same? Danek _______________________________________________ tools-discuss mailing list tools-discuss@opensolaris.org
