A minor diff to update the vim patchlevel and a question.

Ag. Hatzimanikas a.hatzim at gmail.com
Wed Mar 7 11:08:48 PST 2007

On Τρι, Μάρ 06, at 02:22 Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Ag. Hatzimanikas wrote:
> > Now.I would like to update the vimrc page.I think it doesn't provide
> > any serious enhancement as it claims.
> Those are good ideas, but we all have different ways of working.  For
> example, below is mine.  I don't use the graphic version so those areas
> are not applicable to me.
Hi Bruce,

Your options looks quite generic,actually many of them are already
supported by my diff and some of them could be also included,eg... 
set expandtab
set tabstop=4
set shiftwidth=4
set backup
set viminfo='20,\"50
As for the gui stuff,it doesn't really matter as,even if you place the gui
part of my diff in your vimrc,vim will just ignore that part if you are
not running the gui version.
And don't forget that our example vimrc,is just an exhibition and it doesn't 
meant for copy/paste (like a 'cat' here document).

Anyway,I would like to mention the 3 main reasons for my diff.
The first it's in the quote above.
The page doesn't really provide any serious enhancement and so it needs some
The second is that I believe BLFS is mainly an educational document and
like such a document should be able to teach people --behind how to build
a package from sources-- and how to configure a package to take the
best of it.Really important reason in my opinion!

Configuration files are quite critical because this how we will interact 
with the program.That's why I added some more extra info at the end of
my patch with all these vim help commands.It's like to say.Here is how
to build properly a config file,hmmm ...anyway something like this.
Look the almost final version of it,here:

And the third reason it's because I would like to show some of the
'unlimited' vim capabilities,like the humble abbreviation.

Anyway,thinking again more realistically,I really can't find the reason
why this special treatment to vim configuration file over the other
packages.Why it has to have it's own page?
I mean,don't get me wrong -- i am spending my time mostly behind some
really long vim sessions manipulating text; but what was the rationale
behind this decision in the past? Is anyone here that can shed some light
or to point me/us to an old document or something?

Personally I am inclined,when I will open the ticket to put this issue.
Comment out/moving the contents of the vimrc page into vim page under
the configuration section like any other package in the book.

Anyone with opinion?

More information about the blfs-dev mailing list