Hello, Am Donnerstag, 10. Juli 2014 schrieb 1xx:
2014-07-09 12:30 GMT+09:00 1xx
: 2014-07-09 9:05 GMT+09:00 Christian Boltz
:
Just a little detail - I assume you mean integration with zypp (libzypp, zypper, YaST), right? A packagename like etckeeper-zypp-integration might be a better choice ;-)
I think that etckeeper-zypp-plugin is better. Because already snapper-zypp-plugin exists.
Indeed, that's even better than my proposal :-)
After reading the spec, I see that you package a yum plugin if suse_version is not set. The funny thing is that yum is also available for openSUSE [1], so you should also provide a package etckeeper-yum- integration for openSUSE ;-)
Hurm...
The upstream can choose with both yum and ZYpp. But both can not choose. If we want it, we must make a big patch.
I assume you tested this already, but let me ask nevertheless. What about this: (from the spec, marked line added) %if 0%{?suse_version} ... BuildRequires: libzypp BuildRequires: yum # <----- try adding this line %define HPM zypper %else BuildRequires: yum ... %define HPM yum %endif The config file (where the HPM variable is used) will/should be hardcoded to zypp, but besides that it could work. (Needless to say that I didn't test this ;-) Anyway - zypp integration is the most important on openSUSE. yum is just "nice to have", and I wonder if people use yum if they have zypper ;-) Regards, Christian Boltz -- Ich habe ein update für 2.0.1 released, welches die Änderung im Makefile auf die alte Version zurück"portiert" (Was für ein großes Wort für zwei Anführungsstriche). [Ratti in fontlinge-devel - nach Änderung von zwei »'« zu »"« in einem Makefile] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org