[Fedora-packaging] Packaging guidelines for Emacsen add-on packages

[Jesse Keating]

On Wednesday 30 May 2007 15:47:21 Ville Skyttä wrote:
> If I understand correctly, this is an orthogonal issue which isn't limited
> to querying rpm.  For example, different *emacs versions inside and outside
> the buildroot is just as likely as different rpm versions.  What makes
> querying them for versions instead of rpm safer, more predictable, and more
> reproducible?

Because you're querying the emacs in the chroot not outside the chroot.  In 
the case of rpm, the rpm _outside_ the chroot was used to populate the 
chroot, and the rpm database version that winds up in said chroot does not 
match the version of rpm that gets installed inside the chroot.  emacs won't 
have this problem.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Release Engineer: Fedora
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/packaging/attachments/20070530/21168e28/attachment.bin