Menu
▾
▴
vimcdoc-translate
|
From: Simon L. <wzh...@sp...> - 2004-07-13 09:55:13
|
On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 16:13:00 +0800, "Alecs King" <al...@pe...> said: > 1) Why hard-coded the $VIM_PATH instead of checking $VIMRUNTIME like our > old script did? I'd thought that most of the user uses the vim that came with the Linux/BSD distro. And they should reside in /usr/. If not, adding '/usr/share/vim/vimfiles' isn't to rtp that hard either. > > 2) Not root, you cant install files to $VIMCDOC_PATH. > > PS, as for $VIMCDOC_PATH, i prefer to use /usr/local/... instead of > /usr/share. hmm. The only reason I choosed /usr is because it has a better chance of 'work out of box'. What would you prefer? Auto-detection? lang2 -- Simon Liang wzh...@sp... -- Simon Liang wzh...@sp... |
|
From: Alecs K. <al...@pe...> - 2004-07-13 12:01:36
|
On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 10:55:11AM +0100, Simon Liang wrote: > On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 16:13:00 +0800, "Alecs King" <al...@pe...> > said: > > 1) Why hard-coded the $VIM_PATH instead of checking $VIMRUNTIME like our > > old script did? > > I'd thought that most of the user uses the vim that came with the > Linux/BSD > distro. And they should reside in /usr/. If not, adding > '/usr/share/vim/vimfiles' isn't > to rtp that hard either. E.g. Here on FreeBSD (5.2-current), vim is installed to /usr/local/share/vim/vim63/ with no 'vimfiles' sub-directory. I think it's better to check $VIMRUNTIME to support various vim installations. > > 2) Not root, you cant install files to $VIMCDOC_PATH. Sorry. I overlooked the $install_dist_files part. > > PS, as for $VIMCDOC_PATH, i prefer to use /usr/local/... instead of > > /usr/share. > hmm. The only reason I choosed /usr is because it has a better chance of > 'work > out of box'. What would you prefer? Auto-detection? > I dunno if it's a (loose?) convention. But usually all those manually installed software goes to /usr/local/share. (That is, default prefix is /usr/local). Not a big deal, anyway. 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?) Regards, |
|
From: Simon L. <wzh...@sp...> - 2004-07-13 12:48:16
|
> 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? > 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 > > hmm. The only reason I choosed /usr is because it has a better chance of > > 'work > > out of box'. What would you prefer? Auto-detection? > > > > I dunno if it's a (loose?) convention. But usually all those manually > installed software goes to /usr/local/share. (That is, default prefix is > /usr/local). Not a big deal, anyway. Yes. That is the convention and is exactly the reason why I choose /usr instead of /usr/local: only a small portion of user will compile his own Vim. So the user's Vim is more likely to be in /usr. Anyway, I think it is OK to do a 'which vim' for auto-detection. Is that OK? > > > 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' ? lang2 -- Simon Liang wzh...@sp... |
|
From: Alecs K. <al...@pe...> - 2004-07-13 14:53:41
|
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, |
|
From: Simon L. <wzh...@sp...> - 2004-07-13 16:12:02
|
On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 22:54:42 +0800, "Alecs King" <al...@pe...> said: > 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. Just curious. What is installed in /usr/ by default on FreeBSD? > > :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? My idea is that if user uninstall/reinstall/upgrade his/her Vim, vimcdoc should be left alone. Installing in one of the .../vimfiles directory have this benifit. Overkill? > > I think that would be okay. Can you do that and test it on your BSD system please? Thanks, lang2 -- Simon Liang wzh...@sp... |
|
From: Simon L. <wzh...@sp...> - 2004-07-13 12:49:56
|
An OT question to wandys: which BSD are you using? I think there is a FreeBSD port of the vimcdoc. Someone actually sent me (CCed) patch of the port makefile for vimcdoc-0.7.0. lang2 -- Simon Liang wzh...@sp... |
|
From: Alecs K. <al...@pe...> - 2004-07-13 14:56:44
|
On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 01:49:53PM +0100, Simon Liang wrote: > An OT question to wandys: > > which BSD are you using? FreeBSD 5.2-current. > I think there is a FreeBSD port of the > vimcdoc. Geez.. I didnt even know it.. -- Alecs King |
|
From: Alecs K. <al...@pe...> - 2004-07-13 17:11:59
|
On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 05:12:01PM +0100, Simon Liang wrote: > Just curious. What is installed in /usr/ by default on FreeBSD? The base system. $ ls /usr/share bsnmp examples isdn misc pcvt snmp vi calendar games locale mk security syscons zoneinfo dict groff_font man nls sendmail tabset doc info me openssl skel tmac > My idea is that if user uninstall/reinstall/upgrade his/her Vim, vimcdoc > should be left alone. Installing in one of the .../vimfiles directory > have this benifit. Overkill? Ahuh.. This clears my mind. So we can detect $VIM, create $VIM/vimfiles if it does not exist, and then install the *.cnx files. > Can you do that and test it on your BSD system please? Sure. I just waited for an agreement on the VIM_PATH issue. Now it's time to write a new vimcdoc.sh script. :D -- Alecs King |
|
From: Simon L. <wzh...@sp...> - 2004-07-14 08:50:03
|
> > Ahuh.. This clears my mind. So we can detect $VIM, create $VIM/vimfiles > if it does not exist, and then install the *.cnx files. Yes. lang2 -- Simon Liang wzh...@sp... |
×
Want the latest updates on software, tech news, and AI?
Get latest updates about software, tech news, and AI from SourceForge directly in your inbox once a month.
Thanks for helping keep SourceForge clean.
X