Re: source dependencies
On Wed, 23 Jul 1997, Santiago Vila Doncel wrote:
> I don't know automake well but I think autoconf is very similar.
> Taking it as an example, we have two choices here:
>
> a) If we ever modify configure.in, the maintainer should run autoconf
> so that the .diff file contains also the diffs for the new configure
> script, and autoconf is not needed again at build time.
>
> b) We run autoconf at build time.
>
> I think a) is the best solution, but I'm not sure.
I don't know automake at all but, in my ignorance, I have a comment
which I think might be apt.
I used to have a lot of packages. Currently I have none, but I
expect to pick up some and resume maintainer work. Back when
I did have packages, I tried to follow some self-imposed strictures.
Among these were:
* If build scripts are modified, rename them debian.something
(nowadays, I think that would be debian/something), and invoke
the debianized build scripts from debian.(nowadays/)rulesa.
* if source code modifications are made, do the modifications in
#ifdef DEBIAN blocks.
The point of this was to touch the pristine upstream source as
lightly as possible, and to make it easy to determine what had
and had not been touched without resorting to diffs. Ideally,
source file modifications would all be in #ifdef DEBIAN bvocks,
In line with this philosophy, I'm a bit uncomfortable with
hiding debianizing changes in the diffs so that it is difficult
to discover what has been done by looking at the debian.*
(nowadays debian/*) files.
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: