On Tuesday 08 May 2007, Jonathan Underwood wrote: > > Actually, thinking more about it, having a Requires:emacs-common is > sub-optimal, as the user who oesn't have any emacs package installed > could install the add-on, which would pull in emacs-commonm, but not > emacs or emacs-nox. That's right, but IMHO it's the lesser evil when compared to insisting on a particular flavour of the actual emacs binary. Mileages vary and I'm not going to insist on that though ;), especially because: > > I will open a bugzilla RFE asking for a virtual Provides: emacs(bin) > > though for the future, I think that's a good idea. > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239374 Thanks, added a comment there. -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
