[Vimcdoc-translate] Re: Re: about the new vimcdoc.sh in 0.7.0

[Alecs K. <al...@pe...>]

On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 01:48:13PM +0100, Simon Liang wrote:
> 
> > E.g. Here on FreeBSD (5.2-current), vim is installed to
> > /usr/local/share/vim/vim63/ with no 'vimfiles' sub-directory. 
> By default or when you compile your own Vim?

Installed it from ports.

> 
> > I think
> > it's better to check $VIMRUNTIME to support various vim installations.
> System wide installation can only reside in $VIM/vimfiles/doc. That is 
> the only make-sense location. So maybe we can detect whether Vim 
> is installed in /usr or /usr/local

'Only'? Here on fbsd, the doc path is /usr/local/share/vim/vim63/doc.
$VIM: /usr/local/share/vim
$VIMRUNTIME: /usr/local/share/vim/vim63

:h rt shows that on UNIX $HOME/.vim, $VIM/vimfiles, $VIMRUNTIME,
$VIM/vimfiles/after and $HOME/.vim/after are all okay.

Correct me if i'm wrong:
All has $VIMRUNTIME, but not all has $VIM/vimfiles. So why not just
detect and use $VIMRUNTIME?

> do a 'which vim' for auto-detection. Is that OK?

Good idea. Anyway, this is for $VIMCDOC_PATH. So it may not be as
important as the $VIM_PATH issue above. Just using /usr/share or
/usr/local/share without detection also works.

> 
> > 
> > 
> > 3) The '-D' option of 'install' is a GNU/Linux style option, whereas
> > BSD install does not have this option but '-d' instead.
> > (Back to use mkdir & cp?)
> 
> hmm. I never used BSD myself. What if we 'mkdir' explicitely and leave
> out the '-D' ?

I think that would be okay.

Regards,