2009/11/7 Jason L Tibbitts III <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx>: >>>>>> "JU" == Jonathan Underwood <jonathan.underwood@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > JU> A new draft of the guidelines is here: > JU> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/EmacsPackagingRevised > > These do look significantly simpler, which is generally a good thing. > Is there a good way to see the actual diffs between this and the > existing guidelines? Or could you summarize them in a bit more detail? > OK, I did diff the original and revised guidelines, but it's not that easily digested, so I'll attempt a summary. Some of the primary concerns with (x)emacs add on packages are: 1) Correct package and sub-package naming and organization 2) Installing the files in the right places 3) Ensuring that the version of (x)emacs that was used to byte compile the elisp files is a requirement of the package - requiring build time detection of the (x)emacs version With the current guidelines, points 2 and 3 were handled by calling pkg-config to define macros at add-on package build time. This makes use of a pkg-config file installed with the (x)emacs package. With the revised guidelines we make use of macros in the files /etc/rpm/macros.[x]emacs to ensure the relevant macros are defined for add-on package building. This removes the pkg-config complexity and removes a lot of boilerplate from the spec files. That's the main point of the guideline update. At the same time I've reorganised the guidelines for clarity and simplicity. I hope they're a lot easier to follow now. > Also, I think you might as well go ahead and remove BuildRoot: and the > first line after %install from the templates, since they're not > required in any supported Fedora release at this point. OK, thanks, have done that. Cheers, Jonathan -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
