On Fri, 2007-03-09 at 12:50 -0500, John Dennis wrote: > Here is the summary as I see it: > > There is nothing wrong with rpmlint, it is properly complaining about > two packages which both claim to own the same file, that's a conflict > and we don't want conflicts. > > To get us to a situation where there can be two versions of emacs (a > reasonable goal) we have the following choices: > > * have a package which owns /usr/bin/emacs and install a script to start > the preferred version. emacs and emacs-nox both require this package. > > * use alternatives (yuck!), I don't think it's appropriate for this > purpose and its just plain nasty, but it solves the file conflict > problem. > > I think the first solution is preferable, a master package, plus there > are many files in emacs which would be shared between X version and the > nox version, these can all go in the master package. Ugh. Is that the rpmlint warning that this is all about? You already have an emacs-common package for files shared between emacs with x and emacs without x. Move the /usr/bin/emacs script into the emacs-common package and have done already. -Toshio
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers
-- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
