Re: xemacs & redhat

MB> I think part of the problem is that gnuserv's have evolved MB> independently, and our gnuserv and FSF Emacs' gnuserv are no longer MB> compatible. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. Could be. But XEmacs gnuserv works with FSF emacs. So, if xemacs rpm uninstalls gnuserv rpm--no harm is done. M> 2. Better yet, e/ctags might be better off as a separate package, and redhat M> might agree to unbundle them from emacs.rpm MB> Red Hat does not yet have monopoly-style market share in the operating MB> system market. Certainly Red Hat can create special rpms specifically MB> designed for a Red Hat environment that work properly, I am afraid that you may have lost the original thread... We were discussing how to make xemacs rpm be a good citizen in redhat's distribution, which could possibly make it eligible for inclusion in that distribution. For many people it is enough of a headache to have to download a 15M rpm. And when this rpm doesn't install because of conflicts, it is a turn-off. MB> but that does MB> not solve our problem as to what a vanilla `make install' should do. I think this is hopeless. A vanilla make install probably won't work on a very large percentage of installations either because of other packages or because some particular sysadmin's way to administer the system. This is why I limited the scope of discussion to redhat only, which is still a big chunk of linux market (and most likely will work with Caldera distros as well). --michael