On Sun, 22 Jul 2001, Adrian Bunk wrote: > You should know what you are doing when you update config.guess and > config.sub. One example: Upstream of mtools doesn't like "Stallmanisms", That goes without saying IMHO. This is indeed the reason why I do not want autobuilders doing automatic "autotools-dev'ification" of packages (or whatever). A human is needed to do it properly. > that means he did a s/linux-gnu/linux/g over config.guess, config.sub and > configure.in. In this case every copying of config.guess and config.sub > will give you completely non-working mtools on ARM. That means trying to mtools upstream is braindamaged? Well, one can route around it: have the master config.sub/guess (updated from autotools-dev by debian/rules) in config/, and sed it to the "non-Stallman" version in ./, which is used by mtools. BTW, thanks for this interesting trivia. I didn't know someone was THAT much against "gnu-linux" to do that :) -- "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh
Attachment:
pgpKuautlTSA4.pgp
Description: PGP signature