[xine-devel] Re: [xine-cvs] CVS: xine-lib/misc Makefile.am,1.16,1.17

[Matthias D. <mat...@we...>]

On Sun, May 19, 2002 at 12:09:32 +0200, Siggi Langauf wrote:

> Umm, you're right that "rpm -ta" requires the .spec file, but if I
> understood correctly (matthew2k: please correct me if I'm wrong!), the
> =2Espec file _only_ works reliably on the system where ./configure has
> been run to generate it.

 No longer. With the recently checked in spec files, we can safely include
 the spec files with every release and every tarball we make.   They don't
 contain any configuration specific stuff anymore.    So most (if not all)
 problems reported earlier, should be gone...  I have also updated the FAQ
 about this, to make things clear.

> That's the reason why several people tried rpm -ta on the
> release tarballs, and failed, and complained on our mailing lists.
> And finally, that's why G=FCnter removed the .spec file and Matthias
> documented everything, isn't it??

 Could be. With the old spec files,   a simple rpm -ta could have resulted
 in trouble *if* the tarball packager had support for plugins  and  stuff,
 that the guy who tried to use rpm -ta didn't have... and thus  you  would
 end up with files missing or if the prefix was changed, wrong pathes. But
 like said earlier, this is history. And no, I didn't document everything,
 I just sat myself down and revamped the old specs... that's all. :)

> Well, chances are that I simply missed something here. In that case: sorry
> for the interrupt...

 Well... I have no clue what's this about at the moment, because  I  have
 missed this thread so far. :)  So if there are any questions unanswered,
 let me know, ok?

So long guys,
Matthias.

--
]) mat...@we..., GPG 0x51FA41C6, matthew2k on JABBER.org, ICQ# 89464954 ([

He keeps differentiating, flying off on a tangent.