On Mon, Jul 10, 2006 at 07:38:02AM +0000, Yakov Lerner wrote: >It is so much easier and predictable to build & install vim from >sources youself, (with exactly the features you need), than hunt
I understand that some people believe this, but as a large-scale system administrator I disagree. If I avoid the native packaging system, how will I know when there are (possibly security-related) updates available? I currently have over 1251 packages installed on my system, do you know how long it would take to correctly (let alone optimally) package and build, to say nothing of hunting down and apply updates, for this laptop? Factor in, say, 100 machines in various stages of production or test, and you suddenly have to build an empire just to maintain them. >package-maintiners and expect them to fine-tune binary packages >to your inquiries/needs/wishes. Unless you are package-maintiner Having an expert tune the packages for the general cases is probably going to work much better on average than having the layman try to tune it themselves. A good package maintainer can make it so that a package fits nearly everyone's needs. I have submitted a suggestion to the Fedora packager that they extend the "vim-x11" package to include not only "gvim", but also "xvim", leaving the stock "vim" package being compiled with --with-x=no. This way you get the fairly minimal package in "vim-minimal", and users who want vim on a server without X installed are happy. And users who want enhanced X capabilties can install "vim-x11" and get enhanced functionality by calling (or aliasing) gvim or xvim. Seems like a workable solution that will make everyones lives easier. >yourself, why would they follow your preferences rather than, say, >their own preferences ? A packager is doing the packaging as a community service. They rarely do it to their own preferences. If you are a Fedora packager, you almost never get to consider only your own preferences. This is why there is the review process. >Look like the pat of Sean Reifschneider's problem is that No, my problem is that vim --with-x=no works identically to other applications running in X terms. However, it can't make use of the extremely cool automatic "paste" function. Configuring it so you get automatic pasting causes it to act extremely differently than other xterm applications. --with-x=yes or --with-x=no doesn't matter. The only thing that --with-x=yes fixes is that when you ":set mouse=a" in a vim built --with-x=no, the pasted text comes from, I think, the 0 buffer and not the X selection. My understanding of this is that the problem is that when you ":set mouse=a", it send the escape sequence to tell xterm to send mouse events. So, instead of xterm sending the selection when you click the middle mouse button, it sends a "Middle mouse button pressed" message. Thanks, Sean -- I find that a great part of the information I have was acquired by looking up something and finding something else on the way. -- Franklin P. Adams Sean Reifschneider, Member of Technical Staff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> tummy.com, ltd. - Linux Consulting since 1995: Ask me about High Availability
