[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Linda warnings



* Roberto C. Sanchez (roberto@familiasanchez.net) wrote:
> On Sun, May 29, 2005 at 06:40:26PM -0400, Eric Dorland wrote:
> > 
> > I don't think a dependency on automake and autoconf are almost always
> > bad ideas. It makes the build more unpredictable, which is generally a
> > bad thing. You should just run automake and/or autoconf on the
> > unpacked source and ship it in the .diff.gz. An extra 2K won't hurt. 
> >  
> I tried that once to see the difference.  It went from ~4K to ~61K.  Is
> that OK?  In effect, the only thing changed in configure.in is the GTK
> macro to look for GTK 2 instead of 1.2.  I have not had any weirdness
> buidling on my sarge box or in clean Sarge and Sid chroots.

That seems somewhat unusual. Which package was this? But really, why
quibble over 57K? Is that really a problem we should be worrying
about? 

I've seen it a few times over the years, and they're usually pretty
wacky.  


-- 
Eric Dorland <eric.dorland@mail.mcgill.ca>
ICQ: #61138586, Jabber: hooty@jabber.com
1024D/16D970C6 097C 4861 9934 27A0 8E1C  2B0A 61E9 8ECF 16D9 70C6

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GCS d- s++: a-- C+++ UL+++ P++ L++ E++ W++ N+ o K- w+ 
O? M++ V-- PS+ PE Y+ PGP++ t++ 5++ X+ R tv++ b+++ DI+ D+ 
G e h! r- y+ 
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: