On 03/12/2020 20:41, Ben Cotton wrote:
On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 3:32 PM Tom Hughes via devel
<devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
What exactly does "change the default on upgrade" actually mean
here? Making nano-default-editor a dependency of something else
that people are likely to have installed? Or adding something to
some sort of post install script for system-upgrade that installs
that package?
From the BZ Miro linked to in the start of this thread:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1896707#c12
Oh sorry I only read the change proposal. I didn't realise this
had actually accidentally happened and I thought it was being
proposed for the next release.
Obviously I missed it by using distro-sync instead of system-upgrade
for my systems ;-)
dnf system-upgrade also upgrades groups, so nano-default-editor gets installed
on system upgrades
If I accept our argument then how do I choose not to accept your
opinion and "explicitly override" this choice?
Also from that bug:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1896707#c13
"dnf remove nano-default-editor". Alternatively, you can set "export
EDITOR=vim" in your ~/.bash_profile
Setting EDITOR doesn't really work. I mean I have that but my problem
is always when I'm sudoing and suddenly get nano instead of vi which
isn't solved by that.
Tom
--
Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu)
http://compton.nu/
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
