Well that's a question. All three shouldn't be installed at the same time. I haven't built a vim-tiny package yet, but in the case of the current vim package and vim-full it overwrites that binaries. (IE: pkg contents overwrite one another). So the practical implication is that if you don't remove one package first is that your package database will have info for both packages, but whichever is the most recent will take precedence. (This isn't so much of a problem if vim-full will be the latest packages installed).
Being as I'm not sure if providing alternate packages is acceptable by downstream consumers, (Solaris, Indiana) I defer to your guidance. We can if neccessary forgo the option to install an alternate vim-tiny, and have the second package be gvim instead of vim-full, which would leave vim and gvim to coexist as separate binaries. This would require a change so that "vim -g" would no longer work, and it would also leave the question as to how to handle the additional language bindings. (At some point we have to make an assumption about what is part of the base OS, as we can't provide an full set of combinatorials). -Brian On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 10:16 AM, Danek Duvall <danek.duvall at sun.com> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 03:11:19AM -0400, Brian Gupta wrote: > >> My original thoughts were that the vim and gvim packages would be able >> to coexist, but I am thinking now, that I should make a vim-full >> package that is an alternate to the almost minimal (but not quite >> tiny-vim) package that currently exists. IE: We will have a choice of >> vim-full, vim-current or tiny-vim. > > What happens when all three are installed? > > Danek > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/OpenSolaris_New_User_FAQ
