Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: > There was a thread _very_ recently on -devel about wether to > autoconf&automake at packaging time or at build time, and as far as I > remember, the conclusion was that it would cause less surprises if > it were to happen at packaging time. This introduces however the problem > of different autotools versions, which I circumvented altogether this > way. Yeah, after all there is nothing suprising in a newer linux kernel making an innocuous change that causes packages to begin to FTBFS due to timestampery. > I disagree. You never know what kind of special things upstream has done > to their generated files, what extra macro's they had installed, etc > etc. By simply keeping your hands off files you do not need to touch, or > in this case, by painting the dirty spot of your Van Gogh over rather > than repainting the whole painting based on the original sunflower, > there will be no visible consequences if your pencils and paint are of > inferior quality, or your painting skills are inferior, and you don't > even have to bother what pencil and paint Van Gogh used while making his > painting. And of course if Van Gogh happens to be dead or to have switched careers, and some of his mervelous work breaks, only then do you suddenly discover you're SOL. You seem to enjoy living in a suprising world. :-P -- see shy jo
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature