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 Fedorafirstname.lastname@example.org http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review