Re: automake transition breakages
Ian Jackson <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Russ Allbery writes ("Re: automake transition breakages"):
>> Well, the simple answer is that we avoid having to maintain local
>> patches against the upstream source to remove -Werror, since generally
>> it's not something over which we have a choice without patching the
>> upstream source. It's usually expressed in configure.ac.
> I don't think this is a sufficiently good reason to take the portability
> Think, for example, about downstreams (including users) who may want to
> forward-port a package to a different Debian release and thus a
> different automake version.
> For such a central tool as automake, we should tolerate lots of version
> skew slop.
I have not had any problems in practice with my software with -Werror with
Automake, and therefore intend to keep using it with all of the software
for which I'm both upstream and Debian maintainer. (And hence would
oppose Lintian tests, etc.)
If folks are having trouble here with software for which they're not
upstream, I can see the benefit in removing it, but my expectation is that
upstreams who care enough to use -Werror are (like me) probably also going
to care enough to quickly fix problems that result in Automake warnings.
Russ Allbery (email@example.com) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>