Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: ganymed


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191014





------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-05-26 13:11 EST -------
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > (In reply to comment #1)
> > 
> > > * Why have all those macro definitions, conditional and otherwise, at the 
> > > top
> > > instead of just...
> > > %define gcj_support     1
> > > ?
> > 
> > umm Ben Konrath added that part to my initial SPEC, I just thougth it was 
> > just
> > to make easy to package it for RHEL
> 
> I just copied what our other eclipse packages do. Andrew, do you have any
> thoughts here?

Yeah, I added that stuff so that we could do the gcj_support conditionally but
also for other RHEL-specific stuff.  Outside of the Eclipse SDK we probably
don't need it, though.  gcj_support itself should be enough.  Sorry.


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

_______________________________________________
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

Reply via email to