Re: Doesn't contain source for waf binary code
Roger Leigh <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> While the waf behavour does sound quite awful, is this really any
> different than the current behaviour of the autotools? The "configure"
> script is an unreadable mess generated by the expansion of macros in the
> autotools packages; it too bears little relation to the original macros.
But all the original macros are actually present and shipped with the
source (or are obtained from some version of the Autoconf, Automake, and
Libtool packages), and I think that failure to regenerate the configure
machinery with current Autotools would constitute a bug. The difference
with waf is that the sources aren't included and aren't easily obtainable
via another package in Debian one can build-depend on.
I'm converting all of my packages to use dh-autoreconf so that I can
detect such bugs.
Russ Allbery (email@example.com) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>