30.05.2010 21:19, Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) ?:
21.05.2010 20:58, Panu Matilainen ?:
On Fri, 21 May 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) wrote:
I think because macroses should be included before it processed as shell
script.
Is there some var
21.05.2010 20:58, Panu Matilainen ?:
On Fri, 21 May 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) wrote:
I think because macroses should be included before it processed as shell
script.
Is there some variant of %include or similar?
AFAIK, no. E.g. in kde-f
On Fri, 21 May 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) wrote:
>> I think because macroses should be included before it processed as shell
>> script.
>> Is there some variant of %include or similar?
>
> AFAIK, no. E.g. in kde-filesystem, we end up defining things twice, once
Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) wrote:
> I think because macroses should be included before it processed as shell
> script.
> Is there some variant of %include or similar?
AFAIK, no. E.g. in kde-filesystem, we end up defining things twice, once for
the specfile itself and once for the .macros f