On Sat, 27 May 2006 22:47:46 -0400 Michael Jennings <email@example.com> wrote: > On Sunday, 28 May 2006, at 12:39:48 (+1000), > David Seikel wrote: > > > I have no spec-fu, so I would like to know what's going on here. > > Fair enough that the emu modules spec file needed to change, but why > > did every other module need to change as well? > > Module spec files are auto-generated from a centralized template > because of the enormously repetitive nature of module spec files. The > decision was made to blindly populate all subdirectories to > automatically incorporate new modules instead of requiring editing of > some centralized list every time new modules appear. The downside to > this approach is that every module shares the same template, differing > only in module name and version. > > Really, the only file that "changed" per se is > e_modules-TEMPLATE.spec.in in the e_modules/ directory, but in order > to support independent building of each module, the generated .spec.in > files are committed too. > > So far it's no big deal; just one little %if block. If that changes, > though, we may need to revisit the spec issue. Is this due to the emu_client script? That's just an example client script, and the only thing that will happen if it is not available on the installed system is that a dialog will popup complaining that it is missing. On the emu TODO is to have client programs referenced via .order files and .eaps instead of this hard coded one, then we can remove this one little %if block.
Description: PGP signature