Re: Doesn't contain source for waf binary code
Andrey Rahmatullin <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Tue, Feb 07, 2012 at 09:12:37AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
>>> While the waf behavour does sound quite awful, is this really any
>>> different than the current behaviour of the autotools? The
>>> "configure" script is an unreadable mess generated by the expansion of
>>> macros in the autotools packages; it too bears little relation to the
>>> original macros.
>> But all the original macros are actually present and shipped with the
>> source (or are obtained from some version of the Autoconf, Automake,
>> and Libtool packages),
> You must mean "all the original macros should be actually present"
> because it is not always true, as you seem to imply below.
Er, well, no, I did actually mean what I said. However, I suppose it's
possible that some upstreams are generating configure scripts from local
macros in /usr/share/aclocal that they don't ship with the package.
Autoconf actually makes it rather hard to do that (you have to go to some
extra effort to do the wrong thing), but I suppose it's theoretically
I've not run into it personally in years, though, and the few times that I
did run into it, the missing macros were ones that were shipped by other
Debian packages (like pkg-config).
Russ Allbery (email@example.com) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>