On 18/11/2007, Andrew Farris <lordmorgul@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Jonathan Underwood wrote: > > See how the byte compiled file, which should be newer, has an older > > mtime than the uncompiled file? This is causing Emacs to ignore the > > byte compiled files. > > Is the spec file including the compiled file before the uncompiled file? Hm. By "including", do you mean "appearing in a %files section"? If so, then yes, in the spec file the %files section for emacs-vm appears above that for emacs-vm-el. But if this is what determines the file mtimes, I think that's misguided (and undocumented afaik) behaviour. > Copying the files to temp during the build may be whats causing that time issue. > Perhaps so. Naively, what I would've expected to happen is that, for any package and subpackages, all the file mtimes are set to be the same. J. > -- > Andrew Farris <lordmorgul@xxxxxxxxx> <ajfarris@xxxxxxxxx> > gpg 0xC99B1DF3 at pgp.mit.edu > > No one now has, and no one will ever again get, the big picture. - Daniel Geer > ---- ---- > > -- > fedora-devel-list mailing list > fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list > -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
