Re: Bug#733045: debhelper: Can debhelper make autotools-dev updating default behaviour?
On Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 09:01:29PM +0100, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> ❦ 26 décembre 2013 01:04 CET, Colin Watson <cjwatson@debian.org> :
> > It is true that compatibility is sometimes less than ideal, but brushing
> > the problem under the carpet just means that somebody gets to discover
> > this when they're in a hurry trying to fix some unrelated problem years
> > later, when the change in the autotools has been largely forgotten
> > about, rather than it being fixed in a timely fashion.
>
> Urgent updates, like security issues, seldomly need to patch the build
> system. For one hour spent by the maintainer to fix the build system to
> be able to build with a more recent version of automake or a more
> ancient version of automake, how much time is saved by a third-party
> person? Most of the time, none.
I agree with Russ' reply to this, to the effect that the global time
spent doesn't really change much; it just moves it around. I would add
that it's better for the package maintainer to deal with this kind of
thing, since they're familiar with the package, than for drive-by
bug-fixers to have to figure it out.
My perspective on this is rather different from yours, as I *have* been
in the position of having to patch build systems for some pretty urgent
fixes, quite frequently even. In a few cases I have even had to resort
to holding my nose and patching *only* the generated files because it
was just too hideously painful to make them behave properly when the
true source files were touched at all. Nowadays my position is: no
more. I understand the autotools well enough that I'll take the time to
fix it properly, damn it, so that the next person doesn't have the same
problem.
> We don't need to put more burden on maintainers. It is better to really
> build from sources and it is good if you spend time on it, but IMO, we
> can't afford to make this a rule.
Note that I wasn't suggesting it should be made a rule, mainly because
it would be a completely unrealistic rule today. I would like to
eventually get there, but for the meantime I'd settle for it being a
strong guideline and sending a ton of patches to move that along as best
I can.
Of course, autoreconfing has been a strong guideline in
/usr/share/doc/autotools-dev/README.Debian.gz for at least 4.5 years
now, which is referenced from devref 6.7.1 ... the trick is to get
enough people to notice it.
--
Colin Watson [cjwatson@debian.org]
Reply to: