Debian bug report logs - #1187, boring messages

Subject: Bug#1187: Various `vi' versions trample on each other.
Reply-To: iwj10@cus.cam.ac.uk (Ian Jackson), debian-bugs@pixar.com
Resent-From: iwj10@cus.cam.ac.uk (Ian Jackson)
Resent-To: debian-devel@pixar.com
Resent-Date: Tue, 01 Aug 1995 16:48:38 GMT
Resent-Message-ID: <debian-bugs-handler.1187.08011648355575@pixar.com>
Resent-Sender: iwj10@cus.cam.ac.uk
X-Debian-PR-Package: nvi, elvis
X-Debian-PR-Keywords: 
Received: via spool for debian-bugs; Tue, 01 Aug 1995 16:48:38 GMT
Received: with rfc822 via encapsulated-mail id 08011648355575;
          Tue, 01 Aug 1995 16:48:35 GMT
Received: from pixar.com by mongo.pixar.com with smtp
	(Smail3.1.28.1 #15) id m0sdJTJ-000D66C; Tue, 1 Aug 95 08:43 PDT
Received: from bootes.cus.cam.ac.uk by pixar.com with SMTP id AA07342
  (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for debian-bugs-pipe@mongo.pixar.com); Tue, 1 Aug 1995 08:43:02 -0700
Received: by bootes.cus.cam.ac.uk
	(Smail-3.1.29.0 #36) id m0sdGLD-000C0SC; Tue, 1 Aug 95 13:22 BST
Received: by chiark
	id <m0sd6Yk-0002ZXZ@chiark.al.cl.cam.ac.uk>
	(Debian /\oo/\ Smail3.1.29.1 #29.33); Tue, 1 Aug 95 02:55 BST
Message-Id: <m0sd6Yk-0002ZXZ@chiark.al.cl.cam.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 95 02:55 BST
From: iwj10@cus.cam.ac.uk (Ian Jackson)
To: Debian bugs submission address <debian-bugs@pixar.com>

Package: nvi, elvis
Version: nvi 1.34-5, elv-vi 1.8pl4-12

Observe that in the transcript below, I
 (a) ask that vim be installed as `my default editor' (meaning as
/usr/bin/vi, this is a separate bug which I have already reported).
 (b) see informative but potentially alarming-looking ls output from
nvi.
 (c) get an error message from elv-vi that is
   (i) inappropriate - there is no error here and
   (ii) in any case not reported back to dpkg via a non-zero exit
        status and not drawn to the user's attention using a prompt
        (as it should have been if it really was an error).

Please could all `vi' versions:
 (a) always - without prompting or producing large amounts of output -
install themselves as /usr/bin/vi in the postinst if no vi is already
installed.  If they do this should always install a link
/usr/man/man1/vi.1 (even if there is already such a link).
 (b) in *removal* prerm calls only (not upgrade ones) remove the
/usr/bin/vi link if it points to themselves, possibly producing a
brief message.

Ian.


Would you make vim your default editor (y/n)? y

Setting up joe ...
Setting up nvi ...
/usr/bin/vi exists
lrwxrwxrwx   1 root     root            3 Aug  1 02:41 /usr/bin/vi -> vim
/usr/man/man1/vi.1 exists
lrwxrwxrwx   1 root     root            5 Aug  1 02:41 /usr/man/man1/vi.1 -> vim.1

Setting up pico ...
Setting up ee ...

Setting up elv-vi ...
/usr/bin/vi exists
lrwxrwxrwx   1 root     root            3 Aug  1 02:42 /usr/bin/vi -> nvi
/usr/man/man1/vi.1 exists
lrwxrwxrwx   1 root     root            5 Aug  1 02:42 /usr/man/man1/vi.1 -> nvi.1
/usr/bin/ex exists
lrwxrwxrwx   1 root     root            3 Aug  1 02:42 /usr/bin/ex -> nvi
/usr/man/man1/ex.1 exists
lrwxrwxrwx   1 root     root            5 Aug  1 02:42 /usr/man/man1/ex.1 -> nvi.1

ERROR:  Elvis installation normally makes symbolic links in /usr/bin
        from elvis to vi, ex, view, and input; and in /usr/man/man1
        from elvis.1 to vi.1, ex.1, view.1, and input.1.  However,
        One or more of these filenames was found to be not available,
        as is shown above.  Because of this, these elvis files will
        not be linked to these other filenames as is normally done.

        You may create these links manually if desired, or you may
        delete the files elvis found in place and reinstall elvis
        and the links will be created during reinstallation.


Setting up gnuplot ...
Setting up ldso ...

From: iwj10@thor.cam.ac.uk (Ian Jackson)
To: iwj10@cus.cam.ac.uk (Ian Jackson)
Subject: Bug#1187: Acknowledgement (was: Various `vi' versions trample on each other.)
In-Reply-To: <m0sd6Yk-0002ZXZ@chiark.al.cl.cam.ac.uk>
References: <m0sd6Yk-0002ZXZ@chiark.al.cl.cam.ac.uk>

Thank you for the problem report you have sent regarding Debian GNU/Linux.
This is an automatically generated reply, to let you know your message has
been received.  It is being forwarded to the developers' mailing list for
their attention; they will reply in due course.

If you wish to submit further information on your problem, please send
it to debian-bugs@pixar.com, but please ensure that the Subject
line of your message starts with "Bug#1187" or "Re: Bug#1187" so that
we can identify it as relating to the same problem.

Please do not reply to the address at the top of this message,
unless you wish to report a problem with the bug-tracking system.

Ian Jackson
(maintainer, debian-bugs)

Subject: Bug#1187: Various `vi' versions trample on each other.
Reply-To: mitchell@mdd.comm.mot.com (Bill Mitchell), debian-bugs@pixar.com
Resent-From: mitchell@mdd.comm.mot.com (Bill Mitchell)
Resent-To: debian-devel@pixar.com
Resent-Date: Tue, 01 Aug 1995 18:03:02 GMT
Resent-Message-ID: <debian-bugs-handler.1187.08011754104521@pixar.com>
Resent-Sender: iwj10@cus.cam.ac.uk
X-Debian-PR-Package: nvi, elvis
X-Debian-PR-Keywords: 
Received: via spool for debian-bugs; Tue, 01 Aug 1995 18:03:02 GMT
Received: with rfc822 via encapsulated-mail id 08011754104521;
          Tue, 01 Aug 1995 17:54:10 GMT
Received: from pixar.com by mongo.pixar.com with smtp
	(Smail3.1.28.1 #15) id m0sdLUy-000CwQC; Tue, 1 Aug 95 10:53 PDT
Received: from motgate.mot.com by pixar.com with SMTP id AA17434
  (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for debian-bugs-pipe@mongo.pixar.com); Tue, 1 Aug 1995 10:52:56 -0700
Received: from pobox.mot.com (pobox.mot.com [129.188.137.100]) by motgate.mot.com (8.6.11/8.6.10/MOT-3.7) with ESMTP id MAA27642; Tue, 1 Aug 1995 12:51:34 -0500
Received: from mdd.comm.mot.com (mdisea.mdd.comm.mot.com [138.242.64.201]) by pobox.mot.com (8.6.11/8.6.10/MOT-3.7) with SMTP id MAA00108; Tue, 1 Aug 1995 12:51:33 -0500
Received: from bb29c.mdd.comm.mot.com by mdd.comm.mot.com (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA13548; Tue, 1 Aug 95 10:51:31 PDT
Received: by bb29c.mdd.comm.mot.com (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA29578; Tue, 1 Aug 95 10:51:19 PDT
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 95 10:51:19 PDT
From: mitchell@mdd.comm.mot.com (Bill Mitchell)
Message-Id: <9508011751.AA29578@bb29c.mdd.comm.mot.com>
To: debian-bugs@pixar.com, iwj10@cus.cam.ac.uk

iwj10@cus.cam.ac.uk (Ian Jackson) said:

> Please could all `vi' versions:
>  (a) always - without prompting or producing large amounts of output -
> install themselves as /usr/bin/vi in the postinst if no vi is already
> installed.  If they do this should always install a link
> /usr/man/man1/vi.1 (even if there is already such a link).

I don't like the way this is currently handled (by my elvis package
or by other vi clones).  However, what is currently done was arrived
at after some considerable discussion.  I implemented it first in elvis,
and asked that others look at it and speak up if they disagreed.  Apparently,
now, the processing I put into elvis has been picked up by nvi.  I don't
know if there are other vi clones in the distribution or whether and to
what extent they may or may not have picked this up.  Let's make sure that,
if we're going to change our minds on this again, we're sure that we're
going to stick with whatever we change them to this time.

As I understand it, you're asking that the processing be changed so
that programs would install themselves under package-specific names,
and would optionally link package-specific binary names to more
generic names ("vi", "ex", ...) if those names are not in use.

The first vi clone installed, then, would use whatever generic names
it wanted.  vi clones installing later would only use names which they
wanted and which were still free (perhaps "ex", but not "vi").

You're also asking that package-specific manpage names be used, and
only linked to generic names if the binary link is done, and that the
manpage link be put in place of whatever file or link might pre-exist
it.

If whatever package had put the overwritten manpage file or link in
place, then, is de-installed; the manpage link will disappear.

Is this the desired behavior?  Are we all agreed on this once and for all?
Will someone take responsibility for documenting this in a maintained
packaging Guidelines document so that there's at least some slight chance
that maintainers adding vi clones in the future will follow these special
guidelines for vi-clone packages?

[ObMention of package-granularity vs. file-granularity handling of
 dependencies and conflicts]

From: iwj10@thor.cam.ac.uk (Ian Jackson)
To: mitchell@mdd.comm.mot.com (Bill Mitchell)
Subject: Bug#1187: Info received (was Bug#1187: Various `vi' versions trample on each other.)
In-Reply-To: <9508011751.AA29578@bb29c.mdd.comm.mot.com>
References: <9508011751.AA29578@bb29c.mdd.comm.mot.com>

Thank you for the additional information you have supplied regarding
this problem report.  It has been forwarded to the developers to
accompany the original report.

If you wish to continue to submit further information on your problem,
please do the same thing again: send it to debian-bugs@pixar.com, ensuring
that the Subject line starts with "Bug#1187" or "Re: Bug#1187" so that
we can identify it as relating to the same problem.

Please do not reply to the address at the top of this message,
unless you wish to report a problem with the bug-tracking system.

Ian Jackson
(maintainer, debian-bugs)

Subject: Bug#1187: Various `vi' versions trample
Reply-To: mitchell@mdd.comm.mot.com (Bill Mitchell), debian-bugs@pixar.com
Resent-From: mitchell@mdd.comm.mot.com (Bill Mitchell)
Resent-To: debian-devel@pixar.com
Resent-Date: Tue, 03 Oct 1995 16:18:02 GMT
Resent-Message-ID: <debian-bugs-handler.1187.B10031608590@pixar.com>
Resent-Sender: iwj10@cus.cam.ac.uk
X-Debian-PR-Package: nvi, elvis
X-Debian-PR-Keywords: 
Received: via spool for debian-bugs; Tue, 03 Oct 1995 16:18:02 GMT
Received: with rfc822 via encapsulated-mail; Tue, 03 Oct 1995 16:08:57 GMT
Received: from pixar.com by mongo.pixar.com with smtp
	(Smail3.1.28.1 #15) id m0t09sV-000HA8C; Tue, 3 Oct 95 09:07 PDT
Received: from motgate.mot.com by pixar.com with SMTP id AA27910
  (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for debian-bugs-pipe@mongo.pixar.com); Tue, 3 Oct 1995 09:07:14 -0700
Received: from pobox.mot.com (pobox.mot.com [129.188.137.100]) by motgate.mot.com (8.6.11/8.6.10/MOT-3.8) with ESMTP id LAA19029 for <debian-bugs@pixar.com>; Tue, 3 Oct 1995 11:07:25 -0500
Received: from mdd.comm.mot.com (mdisea.mdd.comm.mot.com [138.242.64.201]) by pobox.mot.com (8.6.11/8.6.10/MOT-3.8) with SMTP id LAA28193 for <debian-bugs@pixar.com>; Tue, 3 Oct 1995 11:07:22 -0500
Received: from bb29c.mdd.comm.mot.com by mdd.comm.mot.com (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA29069; Tue, 3 Oct 95 09:07:15 PDT
Received: by bb29c.mdd.comm.mot.com (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA21600; Tue, 3 Oct 95 09:07:07 PDT
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 95 09:07:07 PDT
From: mitchell@mdd.comm.mot.com (Bill Mitchell)
Message-Id: <9510031607.AA21600@bb29c.mdd.comm.mot.com>
To: debian-bugs@pixar.com

Let's try this again, filling in the Subject field instead of the
Cc field.

This bug is assigned to "nvi, elvis".  Since elvis and nvi now use
update-alternatives, I've requested that this be reassigned to vim.

From: iwj10@thor.cam.ac.uk (Ian Jackson)
To: mitchell@mdd.comm.mot.com (Bill Mitchell)
Subject: Bug#1187: Info received (was Bug#1187.  Various `vi' versions trample)
In-Reply-To: <9510031607.AA21600@bb29c.mdd.comm.mot.com>
References: <9510031607.AA21600@bb29c.mdd.comm.mot.com>

Thank you for the additional information you have supplied regarding
this problem report.  It has been forwarded to the developers to
accompany the original report.

If you wish to continue to submit further information on your problem,
please do the same thing again: send it to debian-bugs@pixar.com, ensuring
that the Subject line starts with "Bug#1187" or "Re: Bug#1187" so that
we can identify it as relating to the same problem.

Please do not reply to the address at the top of this message,
unless you wish to report a problem with the bug-tracking system.

Ian Jackson
(maintainer, debian-bugs)

From mdd.comm.mot.com!mitchell Tue Oct  3 08:41:13 1995
Return-Path: <mitchell@mdd.comm.mot.com>
Received: from pixar.com by mongo.pixar.com with smtp
	(Smail3.1.28.1 #15) id m0t09Sz-000FGNC; Tue, 3 Oct 95 08:41 PDT
Received: from motgate.mot.com by pixar.com with SMTP id AA25618
  (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for debian-bugs-request-pipe@mongo.pixar.com); Tue, 3 Oct 1995 08:40:52 -0700
Received: from pobox.mot.com (pobox.mot.com [129.188.137.100]) by motgate.mot.com (8.6.11/8.6.10/MOT-3.8) with ESMTP id KAA11293 for <debian-bugs-request@pixar.com>; Tue, 3 Oct 1995 10:41:10 -0500
Received: from mdd.comm.mot.com (mdisea.mdd.comm.mot.com [138.242.64.201]) by pobox.mot.com (8.6.11/8.6.10/MOT-3.8) with SMTP id KAA18944 for <debian-bugs-request@pixar.com>; Tue, 3 Oct 1995 10:41:09 -0500
Received: from bb29c.mdd.comm.mot.com by mdd.comm.mot.com (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA27944; Tue, 3 Oct 95 08:41:07 PDT
Received: by bb29c.mdd.comm.mot.com (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA21562; Tue, 3 Oct 95 08:41:03 PDT
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 95 08:41:03 PDT
From: mitchell@mdd.comm.mot.com (Bill Mitchell)
Message-Id: <9510031541.AA21562@bb29c.mdd.comm.mot.com>
To: debian-bugs-request@pixar.com
Subject: Re: Bug#1187.  Various `vi' versions trample

reassign 1187 vim

From: iwj10@thor.cam.ac.uk (Ian Jackson)
To: sr1@irz301.inf.tu-dresden.de (Sven Rudolph)
In-Reply-To: <199510190043.BAA07764@irz101.inf.tu-dresden.de>
References: <199510190043.BAA07764@irz101.inf.tu-dresden.de> <m0sd6Yk-0002ZXZ@chiark.al.cl.cam.ac.uk>
Subject: Bug#1187: marked as done (was: Various `vi' versions trample on each other.)

Your message dated Thu, 19 Oct 1995 01:43:29 +0100
with message-id <199510190043.BAA07764@irz101.inf.tu-dresden.de>
and subject line Bug#1187: Various `vi' versions trample
has caused the attached bug report to be marked as done.

It is your now responsibility to ensure that the bug report is dealt
with.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I'm
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Ian Jackson
(maintainer, debian-bugs)

Received: with rfc822 via encapsulated-mail id 08011648355575;
          Tue, 01 Aug 1995 16:48:35 GMT
From cus.cam.ac.uk!iwj10 Tue Aug  1 08:43:09 1995
Return-Path: <iwj10@cus.cam.ac.uk>
Received: from pixar.com by mongo.pixar.com with smtp
	(Smail3.1.28.1 #15) id m0sdJTJ-000D66C; Tue, 1 Aug 95 08:43 PDT
Received: from bootes.cus.cam.ac.uk by pixar.com with SMTP id AA07342
  (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for debian-bugs-pipe@mongo.pixar.com); Tue, 1 Aug 1995 08:43:02 -0700
Received: by bootes.cus.cam.ac.uk
	(Smail-3.1.29.0 #36) id m0sdGLD-000C0SC; Tue, 1 Aug 95 13:22 BST
Received: by chiark
	id <m0sd6Yk-0002ZXZ@chiark.al.cl.cam.ac.uk>
	(Debian /\oo/\ Smail3.1.29.1 #29.33); Tue, 1 Aug 95 02:55 BST
Message-Id: <m0sd6Yk-0002ZXZ@chiark.al.cl.cam.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 95 02:55 BST
From: iwj10@cus.cam.ac.uk (Ian Jackson)
To: Debian bugs submission address <debian-bugs@pixar.com>
Subject: Various `vi' versions trample on each other.

Package: nvi, elvis
Version: nvi 1.34-5, elv-vi 1.8pl4-12

Observe that in the transcript below, I
 (a) ask that vim be installed as `my default editor' (meaning as
/usr/bin/vi, this is a separate bug which I have already reported).
 (b) see informative but potentially alarming-looking ls output from
nvi.
 (c) get an error message from elv-vi that is
   (i) inappropriate - there is no error here and
   (ii) in any case not reported back to dpkg via a non-zero exit
        status and not drawn to the user's attention using a prompt
        (as it should have been if it really was an error).

Please could all `vi' versions:
 (a) always - without prompting or producing large amounts of output -
install themselves as /usr/bin/vi in the postinst if no vi is already
installed.  If they do this should always install a link
/usr/man/man1/vi.1 (even if there is already such a link).
 (b) in *removal* prerm calls only (not upgrade ones) remove the
/usr/bin/vi link if it points to themselves, possibly producing a
brief message.

Ian.


Would you make vim your default editor (y/n)? y

Setting up joe ...
Setting up nvi ...
/usr/bin/vi exists
lrwxrwxrwx   1 root     root            3 Aug  1 02:41 /usr/bin/vi -> vim
/usr/man/man1/vi.1 exists
lrwxrwxrwx   1 root     root            5 Aug  1 02:41 /usr/man/man1/vi.1 -> vim.1

Setting up pico ...
Setting up ee ...

Setting up elv-vi ...
/usr/bin/vi exists
lrwxrwxrwx   1 root     root            3 Aug  1 02:42 /usr/bin/vi -> nvi
/usr/man/man1/vi.1 exists
lrwxrwxrwx   1 root     root            5 Aug  1 02:42 /usr/man/man1/vi.1 -> nvi.1
/usr/bin/ex exists
lrwxrwxrwx   1 root     root            3 Aug  1 02:42 /usr/bin/ex -> nvi
/usr/man/man1/ex.1 exists
lrwxrwxrwx   1 root     root            5 Aug  1 02:42 /usr/man/man1/ex.1 -> nvi.1

ERROR:  Elvis installation normally makes symbolic links in /usr/bin
        from elvis to vi, ex, view, and input; and in /usr/man/man1
        from elvis.1 to vi.1, ex.1, view.1, and input.1.  However,
        One or more of these filenames was found to be not available,
        as is shown above.  Because of this, these elvis files will
        not be linked to these other filenames as is normally done.

        You may create these links manually if desired, or you may
        delete the files elvis found in place and reinstall elvis
        and the links will be created during reinstallation.


Setting up gnuplot ...
Setting up ldso ...

From: iwj10@thor.cam.ac.uk (Ian Jackson)
To: iwj10@cus.cam.ac.uk (Ian Jackson)
Subject: Bug#1187 acknowledged by developer (was: Various `vi' versions trample on each other.)
References: <199510190043.BAA07764@irz101.inf.tu-dresden.de> <m0sd6Yk-0002ZXZ@chiark.al.cl.cam.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <m0sd6Yk-0002ZXZ@chiark.al.cl.cam.ac.uk>

This is an automatic notification regarding your bug report.

Responsibility for it has been taken by one of the developers, namely
sr1@irz301.inf.tu-dresden.de (Sven Rudolph).

You should be hearing from them with a substantive response shortly, if
you have not already done so.  If not, please contact them directly,
or email debian-bugs@pixar.com or myself.

Ian Jackson
(maintainer, debian-bugs)