Re: Use of automake & friends vs. just running configure
On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 07:40:15PM +0100, Darren Salt wrote:
> I demand that Marcelo E. Magallon may or may not have written...
> > If you *have* to patch a Makefile or configure script, then by all means,
> > do it. But please please pretty please, remove the cruft that gets
> > generated. That means nuke configure, Makefile.in, Makefile and other
> > stuff on clean. That only makes the diff bigger and noisy and imposible to
> > apply cleanly to newer upstream versions [...]
>
> If you're using something like dpatch, I suggest that you use a patch file
> specifically for this kind of thing - and make sure that it's applied last.
> That way, I find, it's nicely manageable.
I recommend splitting it up into two dpatches: One for the bare changes
to Makefile.am and configure.{in,ac}, and a fixup patch with the
autogenerated changes (and a few touch statements for sane timestamps
unless AM_MAINTAINER_MODE is on). When a new upstream version arrives,
you only have to merge the base patch, then trivially create a new fixup
patch. (When I'm in a good mood, I also strip unrelated changes from the
fixup patch to minimize the cruft in the diff.)
Regards,
Daniel.
Reply to: