* Philipp Kern (phil@philkern.de) wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Eric Dorland wrote: > > Yes, they are necessary tools for developers. But nearly ever project > > I've ever seen ships the files generated from the auto* tools. > > However I feel the use of a build-dependency is a legitimate one if the > package is built directly from the upstream's tagged SCM sources and > thus contains no Autotools output. Why? Just run auto* on the unpacked tarball and ship them in the .diff.gz? What makes it more legitimate in that case? That the upstream developers didn't run the autotools? They would have, if it were a proper release. -- Eric Dorland <eric.dorland@mail.mcgill.ca> ICQ: #61138586, Jabber: hooty@jabber.com 1024D/16D970C6 097C 4861 9934 27A0 8E1C 2B0A 61E9 8ECF 16D9 70C6 -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.12 GCS d- s++: a-- C+++ UL+++ P++ L++ E++ W++ N+ o K- w+ O? M++ V-- PS+ PE Y+ PGP++ t++ 5++ X+ R tv++ b+++ DI+ D+ G e h! r- y+ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature