Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 235437
Emacs support for mercurial, own installed dirs
Last modified: 2008-04-12 09:53:55 EDT
Here's a patch that adds Emacs support for Mercurial in a subpackage.
Included is also a fix for unowned dirs in the package; --record doesn't take
care of them.
Created attachment 151800 [details]
Emacs support, own installed dirs
*** Bug 245359 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
I added the co-maintainers to CC, maybe one of them has the time to process this
Based on the date this bug was created, it appears to have been reported
against rawhide during the development of a Fedora release that is no
longer maintained. In order to refocus our efforts as a project we are
flagging all of the open bugs for releases which are no longer
maintained. If this bug remains in NEEDINFO thirty (30) days from now,
we will automatically close it.
If you can reproduce this bug in a maintained Fedora version (7, 8, or
rawhide), please change this bug to the respective version and change
the status to ASSIGNED. (If you're unable to change the bug's version
or status, add a comment to the bug and someone will change it for you.)
Thanks for your help, and we apologize again that we haven't handled
these issues to this point.
The process we're following is outlined here:
We will be following the process here:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping to ensure this
doesn't happen again.
Reassigning to current maintainer.
Ick, I see a xemacs package has been added as well. The next version of
xemacs-packages-extra will ship mercurial.el too (in the upstream xemacs vc
package). Having two versions installed is asking for trouble, so one of them
should be dropped. I'd prefer to keep the version shipping with
xemacs-packages-extra because that's a version that has been tested to work with
XEmacs and integrated well with their package system. Thoughts?
Also, my fix for the unowned dirs seems to have been dropped without any
comment. Why is that? Was there a problem with it?
Do you believe the xemacs version is different? If so, we should go with that
one. Otherwise, I'd prefer the symmetry of having both emacs and xemacs
together - otherwise user's are going to be a bit confused.
As to the unowned dirs, could you please tell me what are the unowned dirs?
I've looked at your patch but I don't see which change you made to address
The XEmacs version is not different right now. But it has been and there's no
guarantee it won't be in the future (I know, I more or less maintain it in
XEmacs upstream). I'd argue that XEmacs users who are told that mercurial
support is part of XEmacs packages are going to be confused if it is not.
Whereas upstream mercurial does not install any Emacs/XEmacs support by default,
so there shouldn't be too many people specifically expecting it from the
mercurial package. And if XEmacs users use the built in XEmacs packages UI to
update their packages locally, they'll get the XEmacs version in any case. And
when they report bugs back to XEmacs upstream, more confusion will ensue.
I'd not worry about the symmetry, there are several examples already where
XEmacs stuff lives in xemacs-packages-* and does not have to be provided by
other Fedora packages.
Finding the unowned dirs should be trivial from just looking at the output of
"rpm -ql mercurial". At least all created dirs below pythonx.x/site-packages
are unowned. My patch fixes it by not using --record which only records files,
thus leaving dirs unowned unless you add the dirs manually.
1. Agree with moving mercurial xemacs to xemacs-extras.
Note: Personally, I would not have site (load "mercurial") by default. Too
bad it's not an autoload. I installed a site-start, but left this commented
out so user can decide.
2. Fixed ownership of dirs. Because we need the list of files to manipulate
it (for hgk), I kept record but just added the dirs.