Re: Automake 2.50 test summary (was: Re: Proposed Autoconf 2.50 path)

To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Automake 2.50 test summary (was: Re: Proposed Autoconf 2.50 path)
From: Ben Pfaff <pfaffben@msu.edu>
Date: 26 May 2001 09:24:51 -0400
Message-id: <[🔎] 87n1802qfw.fsf@pfaffben.user.msu.edu>
Reply-to: pfaffben@msu.edu
In-reply-to: Ben Burton's message of "Fri, 25 May 2001 23:22:01 -0500"
References: <[🔎] E153Mjo-0003K8-00@pfaffben> <[🔎] 87n180euza.fsf@pfaffben.user.msu.edu> <[🔎] 01052523220102.00557@emerald>

Ben Burton <benb@acm.org> writes:

> >  I took the 197 packages that declare Build-Depends: on autoconf
> 
> What about packages that build-depends: automake?
> 
> I believe I alone maintain more than 6 (KDE) packages that should break. :)  
> I don't personally build-depends: autoconf because the automake dependency 
> already drags that in.

Most of the KDE packages showed up on the "missing" list: they
had no configure.in at the top level.
-- 
Positronic Functional Android Fabricated for Fighting

Reply to:

References:
- Proposed Autoconf 2.50 path
  - From: pfaffben@msu.edu (Ben Pfaff)
- Automake 2.50 test summary (was: Re: Proposed Autoconf 2.50 path)
  - From: Ben Pfaff <pfaffben@msu.edu>
- Re: Automake 2.50 test summary (was: Re: Proposed Autoconf 2.50 path)
  - From: Ben Burton <benb@acm.org>

Prev by Date: Re: Work-needing packages report for May 25, 2001
Next by Date: Re: Proposed Autoconf 2.50 path
Previous by thread: Re: Automake 2.50 test summary (was: Re: Proposed Autoconf 2.50 path)
Next by thread: Re: Automake 2.50 test summary (was: Re: Proposed Autoconf 2.50 path)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread