[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Proposed Autoconf 2.50 path



Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@debian.org> writes:

> [1  <text/plain; us-ascii (quoted-printable)>]
> On Fri, 25 May 2001, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> > here.)  Is the alternative of simply filing a bug on *every*
> > package that Build-Depends: on autoconf acceptable?
> 
> No. However, if you could provide us with a list of all packages that:
> 1) build-depends on autoconf

Only 88 packages according to `zcat Sources.gz | grep-dctrl -F
Build-Depends -s Package autoconf':

aalib alsa-lib alsa-utils amcl aterm bash bibtex2html binutils
blackbox blinkd bumprace bwap clips codebreaker curl denemo
emacs20-dl erlang expect expect5.31 fbgetty fvwm fvwm95 gcc gconf
gdm geomview ghc4 giram gnome-apt gnome-libs gnuplot gql gsl
gstep-core gtetrinet gtk+licq gtkglarea gtranslator gvd happy
hping2 ircii-pana lbreakout lcms lesstif1 libarr libpam-ldap
liece math3d musicbrainz mysql nano nfs-user-server ntop ntp
nwrite oaf objc-poc octave octave2.0 octave2.1 oregano pc532down
plib plib1.3 roxen roxen2 rtf2latex ruby sdl-net1.1 shadow
sodipodi stormpkg tar texmacs tkstep8.0 traceroute utah-glx
vpopmail wmaker wv xchat xfce xkbsel xmmsarts xmps xpuzzles

> 2) do not have a build-depends header AND have a configure.in file

If a package doesn't declare a build-depends on autoconf then it
isn't allowed to use it at build time, since autoconf is not
build-essential.  If a package doesn't need to be re-autoconf'd
at build time then I don't think it's nearly so important that it
works with Autoconf 2.50 - it becomes an upstream problem, not a
Debian build problem.  Obviously still worthwhile to fix, but not
really our problem AFAICT.

> We could have a good idea of which packages really need to be manually
> checked.  I fear there are many.
> 
> You can use the contents files to track down the configure.in files. As for
> a machine with good connectivity for what you need, why don't you ssh to
> klecker.d.o or auric.d.o and do the work from there?

It's a bit difficult to test Automake 2.50 on those machines,
because they do not have Automake 2.50 installed.  I could make a
local installation under my home directory.  I guess I'll get
started on that.
-- 
Ben Pfaff <pfaffben@msu.edu> <pfaffben@debian.org> <blp@gnu.org>
MSU Graduate - Debian GNU/Linux Maintainer - GNU Developer
Personal webpage: http://www.msu.edu/user/pfaffben



Reply to: