Re: Removal of libtool1.4
On Thu, Jan 15, 2004 at 11:42:39AM +0000, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 15, 2004 at 12:18:37PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 14, 2004 at 02:37:01PM +0000, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > > Scripsit Anthony Towns <email@example.com>
> > > > You've got freeradius counted twice; and sodipodi's also been fixed
> > > > afaics. So the nine packages are:
> > >
> > > > cyrus-sasl cyrus-sasl2 ecasound freeradius gnome-velocity libgtop
> > > > rpm wsoundserver xchat
> > >
> > > What about packages whose maintainer uses libtool1.4 when generating
> > > the source package, but don't build-depend on it? The autotools-dev
> > > package documentation claims that this is the best current practise.
> > Where does the autotools-dev say you don't need a build dependency?
> > A missing build dependency on libtool1.4 is an obvious RC bug, and the
> > package will fail to build on every autobuilder.
> Eh? If you generate all the necessary files before uploading, put them
> in your source package, and don't use anything from the libtool1.4
> package in your build process, why should you need to build-depend on
> libtool1.4? This was Henning's example.
Ups, thanks. I misread his mail.
This is definitely a reason to ship Debian 3.1 with libtool1.4 .
> Colin Watson [firstname.lastname@example.org]
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed