On 3/28/20 5:16 PM, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de> (2020-03-17): >> I think enabling vi in the busybox configuration is actually the best >> approach to address this problem as this way we continue to ship vi >> with debian-installer and at the same time get rid of the vim >> dependency which is regularly causing headaches when building >> debian-installer images for Debian Ports. > > Can you expand on that?
src:vim is regularly failing to build from source, even on release architectures and I think that this is rather unfortunate for packages that are required for even a minimal Debian installation. Just the latest upload of src:vim is failing on ppc64el again: > https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=vim&suite=sid > https://buildd.debian.org/status/logs.php?pkg=vim&arch=ppc64el >> It also seems that the maintainer of the vim package would like to >> get rid of vim-tiny which he currently only ships because of >> debian-installer [1]. >> >> Switching the vi implementation in debian-installer from src:vim to >> src:busybox would therefore make both parties happy, I would say. > > I'm not aware of vi playing any part in Debian Installer (there's nano > instead) but maybe I've been missing some piece of information during > all those years? vim-tiny is always installed when debootstrap installs a minimal Debian system and vim-tiny is built from src:vim. My suggestion would be to replace the problematic vim-tiny with the less problematic vile: > https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=vile&suite=sid > Digging a bit more in the mail you pointed to (and its references…), > it seems you might be referring to the “Priority: important” field for > vim-tiny. While this is indeed used in Debian Installer through > debootstrap(-udeb), the former is not depending on anything provided > by vim-tiny. We've had a number of packages having their priorities > changed over the last release cycle(s), mainly initiated by Ansgar. I > don't think vim-tiny is special here, and if the consensus is that it > should no longer be “Priority: important”, I'm not immediately seeing > reasons for the installer team to object. I just want to avoid debian-installer to be dependent on a package that has regularly quality issues and rather replace it with a simple VI clone which will hopefully also take away pressure from the maintainer of src:vim since he can remove vim-tiny (which he actually wants to) and not bother about debootstrap or debian-installer if the package FTBFS in unstable again. Adrian -- .''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz : :' : Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org `. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de `- GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913
