Re: Best practice for cleaning autotools-generated files?
Vincent Danjean writes ("Re: Best practice for cleaning autotools-generated files?"):
> On 16/03/2011 14:59, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > I think this is bad advice. These files should be shipped in the
> > source package.
> >
> > Doing that makes it much easier to build the package in unexpected
> > environments (eg, backports, downstream distros).
>
> Then, you need a way to patch them. There is lots of software where
> you need to patch configure.ac and/or Makefile.am
That's fine, you patch the input, rerun the autofoobar stuff, and then
build the source package with diff. If you're using a patch queue
system, or a vcs, you arrange for the autogenerated autofoobar output
changes to be committed along with the corresponding input change.
> If you do it with the patch system (quilt or even plain dpkg),
> before building the package source, you cannot ensure that files are
> patched in the right order.
What do you mean "in the right order" ?
> So Makefile rules can then re-run auto* tools at build time and you
> lost the benefit you want to have.
Makefile rules should not rerun auto* stuff at build time.
Ian.
Reply to: