On Mon, Aug 01, 2011 at 10:28:17PM +0000, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> >Maybe simply coding it differently inside joe will be the best solution -
> >if it notices that $self is 'editor', then don't just look for
> >/etc/joe/${self}rc but instead look itself up once again through
> >/etc/alternatives/editor to see what actual $variant was chosen, and then
> >use that /etc/joe/${variant}rc.
>
> Ugh that is some major Debian specific source patching.
> It can be done, but I'm not really comfortable with this
> way out if we have another. I could hack it if really needed,
> but the alternatives system is Debian specific, and we can't
> even simply use realpath either, because the joe variants are
> symbolic links (by design).
>
> My plan is: have a coordinated upload of src:joe and src:jupp
> whose binary packages (all three) Break the previous versions
> of the other editor and move the alternative to /etc and have
> a symlink to it. I can prepare a patch for joe if you want.
>
> Parallel to that, we ask the dpkg people if we can move to a
> slave, and include that in the upload if possible (since I've
> fixed it "for now", that upload isn't time critical).
Well, I don't like that idea because it involves pretty much the same amount
of work to accomplish the same Debian-specific solution.
And if you no longer have /etc/joe/editorrc but instead /etc/editorrc,
then that still requires source patching for joe to actually *read* it,
so you're back to square one.
I mean really, when we get back to the basics - if we in Debian decided to
invent this "editor" symlink to editors, then it's perfectly acceptable for
us to make actual editors work properly with that, rather than jump through
hoops. Who exactly could complain about that?
--
2. That which causes joy or happiness.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
