2009/1/4 Matthew Saltzman <mjs@xxxxxxxxxxx>: > On Sun, 2009-01-04 at 16:30 +0000, Jonathan Underwood wrote: >> 2009/1/4 Chitlesh GOORAH <chitlesh.goorah@xxxxxxxxx>: >> >> Another aside: Other the past few months I've noticed that many >> packages don't create a separate emacs-foo subpackage but rather use a >> trick with %triggerin to drop elisp files into place when emacs is >> installed. I also think this should be discussed and documented in the >> packaging guidelines as an alternative when a package only has 1 or 2 >> elisp files. >> >> A further aside: I think the emacs guidelines should only insist on >> separate emacs-foo-el sub-packages when there are a large number of >> .el files. Perhaps. Maybe. > > What happens when one installs a package with .el files and installs > emacs later? How would one go about getting the .el files for your > package in that case? > See the triggerin scriptlet in eg. rpmdevtools - on emacs installation symlinks aer created in the /usr/share/emacs/site-lisp tree to the .el(c) files as needed. > In the case of subpackages, I'd be able to just yum list \*emacs\* to > see what I need to add after the fact. Yep, agreed, and that's one of the reasons why, when i drafted the emacs packaging guidelines I detailed creating a separate emacs-fool-[el] subpackage. However, the ubiquity of the triggerin approach in current packages suggests there is some merit. Personally, I think it needs further discussion, and was planning to take it to the packaging list when I have a free moment. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
