svn commit: r372622 - in head/editors/vim: . files

[Baptiste Daroussin]

On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 12:33:45PM +0100, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 12:24:04PM +0100, Mathieu Arnold wrote:
> > +--On 16 novembre 2014 11:29:29 +0100 olli hauer <ohauer at gmx.de> wrote:
> > |> +.if ${PORT_OPTIONS:MDEFAULT_VIMRC}
> > |> +	${INSTALL_DATA} ${FILESDIR}/vimrc
> > |> ${STAGEDIR}${DEFAULT_VIMRC_LOCATION}/vimrc +.endif
> > |>  
> > | ...
> > | 
> > | Thanks for installing a default vimrc file, but isn't it safer to install
> > | the vimrc file with the @sample macro to protect users having already a
> > | own vimrc file installed?
> > 
> > Yes, please, install a .sample file and use @sample in the plist, you're
> > going to overwrite people's existing vimrc.
> > 
> I first asked alfred to do such before the commit.
> 
> But when looking at how vim handles vimrc this is a fallback location hence this
> vimrc is only loaded only if there is no user supplied vimrc
> 
> ':version' will show you:
>    system vimrc file: "$VIM/vimrc"
>      user vimrc file: "$HOME/.vimrc"
>  2nd user vimrc file: "~/.vim/vimrc"
>       user exrc file: "$HOME/.exrc"
>   fall-back for $VIM: "/usr/local/share/vim"
> 
> So now I'm thinking there is no need for a @sample ...vimrc.sample given this
> vimrc is doing to be installed in the fall-back location.
> 
> But I do not think adding yet another option is worth, it should probably always
> be installed.
> 
> Regards,
> Bapt

That said isn't using the default upstream provided vimrc a better option than a
custom one?
/usr/local/share/vim/vim74/vimrc_example.vim as vimrc
and probably /usr/local/share/vim/vim74/gvimrc_example.vim as gvimrc?

Best regards,
Bapt
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-ports-all/attachments/20141116/c36711de/attachment.sig>