Re: Bas Wijnen in <20050912125459.GB23935@pcbcn10.phys.rug.nl> > > Please provide an updated upstream tarball. > > > > This will allow you to drop the build-dependency on the autotools, > > which is considered evil by most people anyway. > > Huh? Looking at the output of bootstrap, it runs the autotools. Or do you > mean it should be run before packaging the tarball? The upstream tarball on savannah is broken, it should be updated. (The point of the autotools is that they enable building on as many machines as possible, including those that do not have the autotools installed.) > In any case, I strongly disagree that build-depending on autotools is wrong. > The autotools were created to make platform-independant building possible on > platforms with no special programs (such as the autotools) installed. > However, if they _are_ available, then it's a good idea to regenerate all the > files, because old versions of the autotools can have bugs (and it makes sure > that the source files such as Makefile.am are actually the versions which > produced the Makefile). It's a good idea to use the output from the newest > autotools if possible, and on a Debian system that is easily possible, namely > by build-depending on them. It's a matter of taste. I prefer a bootstrapped tarball, because re-bootstraping on the autobuilders can cause all kinds of funny build failures that weren't there otherwise. (And in most cases it's a waste of build time.) > > Oh, and please ship real files in the tarball: > > > > lrwxrwxrwx 1 cb cb 31 2005-09-12 13:29 COPYING -> /usr/share/automake-1.9/COPYING > > lrwxrwxrwx 1 cb cb 31 2005-09-12 13:29 INSTALL -> /usr/share/automake-1.9/INSTALL > > I agree that real files should be shipped in the tarball. However, to make > sure the diff doesn't get too large, remove such files in the "clean" target > (in debian/rules). If there are real files in the tarball, they shouldn't be in the diff.gz anyway. > > The .orig.tar.gz should be identical to the upstream tarball > > (re-bz2-ipped in your case). > > It should, but as far as I understood it he was himself upstream, so he can > change the upstream tarball. :-) If I understood it wrongly, he should urge > his upstream to remove it, and just use it like this in the mean time. He is upstream, and that's why the tarball should be fixed. Christoph -- cb@df7cb.de | http://www.df7cb.de/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature