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

Re: Doesn't contain source for waf binary code

On Tue, Feb 07, 2012 at 09:47:06AM -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.
They may omit macros from the tarball because of some other things
(starting with a bad tarball generation script). I think I've seen that in
one package but that was long ago and I don't remember details.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: