Re: A debian/rules target to rebuild pre-built stuff?
- To: Russ Allbery <email@example.com>
- Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: A debian/rules target to rebuild pre-built stuff?
- From: Goswin von Brederlow <email@example.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 16:53:31 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] firstname.lastname@example.org>
- In-reply-to: <email@example.com> (Russ Allbery's message of "Tue, 25 Oct 2011 15:28:02 -0700")
- References: <CAKTje6E5K53c0=yXu+c64n26AhLiiRd6A4O5NhhEe1ibuXmPkA@mail.gmail.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <CAKTje6EX3Ltpc=pmTAS4DSdqjcqn+veyVrY0wKoRjMMAMrQnvQ@mail.gmail.com> <20111025082323.GA23963@angband.pl> <email@example.com>
Russ Allbery <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Adam Borowski <email@example.com> writes:
>> If they use AM_MAINTAINER_MODE and it's "disabled" , there's no way
>> to check if they aren't in DFSG and/or GPL violation by shipping
>> sourceless code. Forbidding it would at least deal with patching
>> autotools output rather than source.
> While I like the idea of rebuilding everything from scratch, adding
> Makefile rules to do so is horrible. Automake bungles this miserably and
> it produces all sorts of random unnecessary bugs. With my upstream hat
> on, I will *always* use AM_MAINTAINER_MODE. I'm happy to explicitly call
> autogen during the build process, but I will not use that misfeature.