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

Re: New make is breaking several packages

On Wed, 28 Dec 2005 18:24:14 +0100, Frank Küster <frank@debian.org> said: 

> Frank Küster <frank@debian.org> wrote:
>> Daniel Schepler <schepler@math.berkeley.edu> wrote:
>>> Hopefully this will work on both versions, but again I don't have
>>> easy access to an old make to test it.  There's also the
>>> suggestion elsewhere in the thread to put the script in a make
>>> variable instead.
>> I really think that the maintainers of a central package like make,
>> be it upstream or you,

> Sorry that i didn't check this - I thought that you, Daniel, were
> the make maintainer (thanks Adeodato).  The rest of my statement
> still holds,

>> should consider such a change thoroughly and in fact test
>> alternatives *before* the release or upload.

        I generally do not respond to such clieless inanities, but I
 am feeling generous today. What on earth makes you think that POSIX
 compliance was not thought about thoroughly?  Or did you make that
 asserion up out of thin air?

        And this bit about testing displays a distinct lack of
 experience about real work testing experiences; in fact, the new make
 works just fine on all my packages, and did not have any deleterious
 bahviour change for them -- this is like 30 or so source packages.

>> And a sarge or even woody pbuilder chroot is just a couple of
>> commands away.  Probably you can even install sarge's make_...deb
>> in a sid or etch chroot.

        More inanity, which I shall ignore.

> But now I should add that they should also communicate the
> alternatives for writing Makefiles that work with old and new makes.
> NEWS.gz and NEWS.Debian.gz both have an entry about the change, both
> point to the info file (to two different nodes that I cannot find
> with that exact names), and at the place where I think I'm referred
> to only the new behavior is explained...

        This shall get into the next upload.

        BTW, this is "UNSTABLE". If you can't deal with changes in
 behaviour of unstable right when we are  in a high development phase,
 run Sarge. Or stop the pontification.

How do they get the deer to cross at that yellow road sign? George
Manoj Srivastava   <srivasta@debian.org>  <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

Reply to: