/usr/lib/mime/packages/vim-common contains

  text/plain; view %s; edit=vim %s; compose=vim %s; test=test -x /usr/bin/vim; needsterminal; priority=4
  text/*; view %s; edit=vim %s; compose=vim %s; test=test -x /usr/bin/vim; needsterminal; priority=2

I think the "view %s" in each might better be

  vim -R %s

to be sure of getting vim and not whatever update-alternatives
/usr/bin/view might have been set to.

There was some discussion about the view alternative on debian-devel
last year and the mime-support maintainer had agreed that /usr/bin/see
shouldn't be part of that alternative set.  It doesn't seem like that
change has happened yet, though.

I'd prefer to just leave things be and let things settle out on their
own once the see alternative is gone.

Cheers,

Le Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 10:37:35PM -0500, James McCoy a écrit :

Hi all,

sorry for making you wait.

I would like to finish other works before updating mime-support, but if
I am a bottleneck, please let me know and I will change my priorities.

Have a nice day,

James McCoy <jamessan@debian.org> writes:

I agree see should not be view, but I'd meant this particular bug to be
among the actual vi's -- ie. to be sure of getting vim and not say nvi.


(I've thought further that there's probably no need for the generic "vi"
rules presently in /usr/lib/mime/packages/vim-common.  If each vi
flavour has rules then all are covered.  Or if the rule is present then
it ought to check that a vi exists, and perhaps ought to be in
mime-support package so as not to depend on vim-common in case you've
removed it in favour of nvi etc.)