Vim

[Jacek Konieczny]

On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 09:35:33PM +0200, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote:
> > The problem is that binaries are directly linked to language-specific
> > libraries, without plugins system.
> Plugins would be better but the reality is different. Now the question is: do 
> we want more features or less hdd space used (is there _any_ other point 
> beside hdd space)?

Installation time, backup time, bug probability (bigger systems are more
buggy). One of the great things about PLD was the ability to set up
a minimal system with only the packages that are really required. Some
additional libraries like libasoud, libpgsql, etc. are not problem as
they are small. 

And don't forget, that the HDD may also be a flash card, pendrive or
anything else.

> Take for example heimdal, there is only few people using it but this is the 
> thing which makes PLD very nice for them. No recompilation needed to get 
> things usable.

$ rpm -q --queryformat "%{NAME}\t%{SIZE}\n" alsa-lib postgresql-libs heimdal-libs p>
alsa-lib        854506
postgresql-libs 353192
heimdal-libs    855734
python-libs     2019487
ruby    	35818016

Can you see the difference? python-libs package is even bigger than current vim
package. And Ruby is a monster (I guess that is a PLD packaging bug).

And how many application could make use of Kerberos without direct linking with
heimdal-libs, but only via PAM or cyrus-sasl?

Greets,
	Jacek