Re: [AUCTeX-devel] Re: Adding preview-latex support to Fedora Extra package of auctex

[Jonathan Underwood]

On 24/04/06, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
> That is a strange use of the word "yes".  I'd call that "no", unless
> you are talking about a CVS tarball instead of the last released one.

I looked at the spec file from the released tarball (not entirely
unreasonable behaviour IMO).


> The spec file from AUCTeX CVS is not supposed to need tweaking.

OK - I will give the CVS spec file a whirl when I have a chance.
However, the spec file from the release tarball fails to build on
fedora, and taking a (brief) look now at the CVS spec file, I think it
will bomb out in the same way - as I recall it tries to install files
directly into the tree, not into the buildroot - this is why I
installed preview into the tetex tree, as naively I assumed that was
the right place to put it.

>
> Note that our RPM does _not_ provide preview-latex-common (which LyX
> expects) since it does not install preview.sty into the teTeX tree.
> For this purpose, there should be a separate, independent package in
> the spec file, which isn't the case now.

Ah, ok. I had read in the documentation on the auctex website that you
discouraged breaking the tarball into separate packages for auctex and
preview-latex. I do not have access to the documentation at the
moment, but it seems clear I need to study the "Advice for package
providers" carefully.

Thanks again for the advice, I'll try and do a better job of the next
spec version.

Jonathan