Christian Lohmaier píše v Po 25. 10. 2010 v 22:36 +0200: > Hi Michael, > > On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 10:10 PM, Michael Meeks > <michael.me...@novell.com> wrote: > > Soo ... I hate EPM ;-) not sure if that is a universal feeling, but > > it > > certainly fouls up the compilation, deps and smoke-testing process. > > Well - never did play foul on any of the tinderboxes/buildslaves. > > > Do we use EPM for building the generic Linux builds though ? and if > > so, > > should we ? ;-) and/or is that hyper-useful for tinderboxes / etc. ? In > > general I'd prefer to default to --disable-epm anyway. > > What makes the packaging complicated is not epm, it is the huge > perl-stuff that is surrounding it. (not because it is perl, but that > it is overengineered, more complicated than necessary, etc.) > > So whether you call epm <epm'slistfile> or rpmbuld -bb <rpmspecfile> > doesn't make a real difference to me. The way how that epmlistfile/the > specfile is created is.
Yup, we still use epm for the official Linux build, so we should keep this functionality until we have a better solution. Though, we could disable it by default. Best Regards, Petr _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
