Re: RFC: Emacs add-on packages and make.
Ian Jackson <ian@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:
> Indeed. May I make some initial remarks ?
Please do...
> The document fails to say what the goals of the policy are.
This is true. I need to put some rationale at the beginning of the
document. ATM it's more a cookbook/reference for how to implement the
policy than an explanation of why it exists.
> AFAICT it fails to achieve the most important likely goal of such a
> policy, namely that the (non)-existence of .elc files for a
> particular flavour of emacs doesn't depend on the installation
> order.
Right. If someone adds xemacs20 to an existing Debian system a long
time after they add emacs20, then all the packages should still get
byte-compiled automatically for xemacs20 and installed in the "right"
location, and all the relvant byte-compiled files should be removed
whenever either a flavor of emacs is removed, or when an individual
package is.
There are still some problems. I need to investigate the
intra-add-on-package dependency issue recently raised and see if it's
a real problem, and if so, what should be done about it.
We also need to decide how to handle one package that breaks during
the upgrade of an emacs flavor. Manoj brought this up, but I haven't
dealt with it yet. Elib was the offending package, but we need to
determine how we want to handle this in the general case.
--
Rob Browning <rlb@cs.utexas.edu>
PGP fingerprint = E8 0E 0D 04 F5 21 A0 94 53 2B 97 F5 D6 4E 39 30
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: