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

Re: Incoming directory status

> >From bug 2714, the files are etags.1, ctags.1, etags, ctags,
> emacsclient, b2m, rcs-checkin.
> I suspect xemacs will work with the emacs versions, but removing them
> from xemacs is no solution; xemacs would then depend on emacs.  On the
> assumption that the files in question are identical, we could remove
> them from both packages and put them in a third.  I compiled emacs
> 19.30.  I'd be happy to repackage it if someone could suggest a more
> elegant solution.

Please don't do this.  Our packaging is already getting too granular
as it is.  IMO, we should not continue the practice of giving every
alternative package equal status.  Whenever possible, we should try to
standardize on one package and have the other packages deal with it
accordingly.  For example, in this case, xemacs can either depend on
emacs to get etags, etc., or use dpkg-divert to selectively override
them with its own versions.

David Engel                        Optical Data Systems, Inc.
david@ods.com                      1101 E. Arapaho Road
(214) 234-6400                     Richardson, TX  75081

Reply to: