Re: alternative packaging

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

To: Discussion of RPM packaging standards and practices for Fedora <packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: alternative packaging
From: Christopher Meng <cickumqt@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2013 20:15:18 +0800
Delivered-to: packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <CAOCN9rzMqVsLf8Ev708HTF2Xg9HYbseMmCXEkDTmzHJ-O9xt7A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAHcXnBEHvY1RPTmaFEqZO=G9BLF_3mfow9EtvRDibWB3f7wwMA@mail.gmail.com> <CAOCN9rzMqVsLf8Ev708HTF2Xg9HYbseMmCXEkDTmzHJ-O9xt7A@mail.gmail.com>
Reply-to: Discussion of RPM packaging standards and practices for Fedora <packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

But I'vew found the examples like fcitx.

And are %prexxx still recommended now?
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

References:
- alternative packaging
  - From: Christopher Meng
- Re: alternative packaging
  - From: Nico Kadel-Garcia

Prev by Date: Re: alternative packaging
Next by Date: Packaging Go libraries for Fedora
Previous by thread: Re: alternative packaging
Next by thread: Packaging Go libraries for Fedora
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Fedora Users] [Fedora Desktop] [Fedora SELinux] [Big List of Linux Books] [Yosemite Forum] [KDE Users]

Powered by Linux