Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.

Bug 90424

Summary: Small patch for default release and epoch for rpm-spec-mode.
Product: [Retired] Red Hat Linux Reporter: Dams <anvil>
Component: emacsAssignee: Jens Petersen <petersen>
Status: CLOSED UPSTREAM QA Contact: Brock Organ <borgan>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: 9CC: anvil
Target Milestone: ---Keywords: FutureFeature
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Enhancement
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2003-05-08 04:46:31 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Attachments:
Description Flags
Patch against rpm-spec-mode.el none

Description Dams 2003-05-08 00:01:34 UTC 
From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 Galeon/1.2.7 (X11; Linux i686; U;) Gecko/20030131

Description of problem:
It would be fair to have a default user-defined epoch and a default user-defined
release tag for new spec file.
Please look at the (short) patch against the rpm-spec-mode.el file.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
emacs-21.2-33

How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. emacs &
2. C-x C-f foo.spec RET

Actual Results:  For the release tag : 
Release: 1
and no epoch tag.

Additional info:

Release tag to have the rpm-spec-default-release value instead of "1".
Mandrake packagers could have 1mdk, fedora packagers "0.fdr.1", Matthias Saou
from freshrpms.net fr1, etc.. whatever. Useful thing. (i think).
Comment 1 Dams 2003-05-08 00:03:47 UTC 
Created attachment 91548 [details]
Patch against rpm-spec-mode.el
Comment 2 Jens Petersen 2003-05-08 04:46:31 UTC 
I agree about default release, but the need for a default epoche seems
more dubious to me (epoches should be avoided as far as possible).
At least I don't think epoche should be included when there isn't a default.

(Btw I prefer unified diffs ("diff -u").)

Please send your patch to the maintainer of rpm-spec-mode.el:
Stig Bjørlykke <stigb>, so that he can include it
in the next release.