Re: dpkg-source: unrepresentable changes to source
On 03-Nov-2001 Eduard Bloch wrote:
> My definition of "touch" includeves everything besides the simple
> configure run (and removing configu.{guess,sub}).
I can't do a configure run as there is no configure script!
I do have to run the autotools scripts.
The question is when to run it. Before or after the Debian
diff is built.
>> In fact I do run autogen.sh in the clean rule. Please
>
> WHAT? You should CLEAN, not generate something in the clean rule.
>From /usr/share/doc/autotools-dev/README.Debian.gz:
> Do note that a properly done autogen.sh invocation runs before dpkg has a
> chance to build the source package, so as to make sure an user does NOT need
> any of the programs called by autogen.sh to build the package. This will, in
> fact, ease the load on auto-builders as well since the program will build much
> faster.
Please tell me where I should call the autogen.sh if not
in clean rule to archive this.
>> read the README.Debian from package autotools-dev I
>> mentioned above. It explains this issue much better I
>
> I guess, you misenterpret it a bit.
See above.
>> Not an option as far as I understand this issue
>> up to now. Autobuilders have or might have problems
>> with this.
>
> They should not. If they become trouble, then either your package is
Might be, the should not. But as a matter of fact they do.
What now?
> broken (your problem) or the autotools are broken(others problem, but
> should be okay Sid currently).
There is a third option: They have a incompatible version
of autotools installed. This may happen very easily if a
newer version is installed than the package uses. Just
happened with 1.4 -> 1.5!
If I did misread that README I would be glad if you could
explain what I did understand wrong. IMHO I am right here.
I even looked at some packages which do it this way.
Regards
Florian
--
Florian Hinzmann private: f.hinzmann@hamburg.de
Debian: fh@debian.org
PGP Key / ID: 1024D/B4071A65
Fingerprint : F9AB 00C1 3E3A 8125 DD3F DF1C DF79 A374 B407 1A65
Reply to: