On Thu, 2002-06-13 at 22:55, Joseph Carter wrote: > On Thu, Jun 13, 2002 at 11:16:30PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > > The configure.in shipped with SDL upstream causes lintian errors about > > > things which have been a violation of policy at least as far back as I can > > > remember. My package fixes this in configure.in and then regenerates the > > > build scripts. > > > > You said the magic word. > > > > They are _scripts_. That means you can put them in the diff, and generate > > them while building your _source_ package. No need to build > > configure-scripts as part of building your binary package. > > Do you want to maintain the list in my debian/rules? Here is a possibly > complete list of what would have to be added to (and maintained in) my > rules binary target in order to ensure that autoconf and automake need not > be there: > Seeing as you're hacking with configure.in anyway, why not stick an AM_MAINTAINER_MODE thing in there, might reduce the list a little. > Want me to not call autothings in my build target? Fix dpkg so the above > shit need not litter my rules file. > If you're calling autotools in your package's build target, that is a BUG. That is not what autotools is meant for. Scott -- Scott James Remnant Have you ever, ever felt like this? Had strange http://netsplit.com/ things happen? Are you going round the twist?
Description: This is a digitally signed message part