FS#45406 - [vim] should packages providing xxd be marked as such?
Attached to Project:
Arch Linux
Opened by Corentin Delcourt (codl) - Sunday, 21 June 2015, 16:18 GMT
Last edited by Anatol Pomozov (anatolik) - Monday, 04 January 2016, 20:39 GMT
Opened by Corentin Delcourt (codl) - Sunday, 21 June 2015, 16:18 GMT
Last edited by Anatol Pomozov (anatolik) - Monday, 04 January 2016, 20:39 GMT
|
Details
vim, gvim, and their python3 counterparts all provide
/bin/xxd. An AUR package that I maintain relies on xxd for
building, and it seems wrong to put vim in makedepends,
considering vim is a huge text editor, xxd is a small
utility, and xxd is also available as a standalone package
on the AUR. The xxd package on the AUR conflicts with vim
and gvim, unfortunately.
Shouldn't vim and its variants have provides=('xxd')? This way I could put xxd in my package's makedepends and a user wanting to build it would not have to install vim if they don't have it, they could build xxd from the AUR. |
This task depends upon
Closed by Anatol Pomozov (anatolik)
Monday, 04 January 2016, 20:39 GMT
Reason for closing: Implemented
Monday, 04 January 2016, 20:39 GMT
Reason for closing: Implemented
As of moving xxd to vim-runtime I have no strong opinion. vim-runtime package is for shared syntax/plugin files, not for binaries.