From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 535 invoked from network); 7 Jul 2000 11:53:36 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 7 Jul 2000 11:53:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 10683 invoked by alias); 7 Jul 2000 11:53:22 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 12188 Received: (qmail 10670 invoked from network); 7 Jul 2000 11:53:19 -0000 Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 12:53:17 +0100 From: Adam Spiers To: zsh workers mailing list Subject: adding a toplevel zsh.spec.in file Message-ID: <20000707125317.A1626@thelonious.new.ox.ac.uk> Reply-To: Adam Spiers Mail-Followup-To: zsh workers mailing list Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i X-Home-Page: http://www.new.ox.ac.uk/~adam/ X-OS: RedHat Linux Hi all, I would like to add a zsh.spec.in file to the toplevel directory so that any tarball releases or CVS snapshots can immediately be built into RPMs with $ rpm -ta zsh-3.1.x-dev-y.tar.gz Are there any objections to this? If not there are a few issues to clear up: - Do we also bundle a zsh.spec in releases? I vote yes, otherwise the whole exercise is a bit pointless. - Should zsh.spec be included in the CVS tree? Yes goes against the grain, since all other auto-generated files aren't, but no means that CVS snapshots can't be built immediately as above. - I would like to include some sample startup files for a typical RedHat box. I already have these - taken from an official RedHat zsh rpm, and then much improved (mainly through suggestions from Bart). Would it be OK to add these in a new StartupFiles/RedHat directory? Or is it time that the current StartupFiles files (written for 2.7) got a rehaul anyway? Adam