On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 03:19:36PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > Bas Wijnen <wijnen@debian.org> writes: > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 09:21:29AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > > >> Always re-running autoconf and automake would increase the number of > >> FTBFS's that we'd need to fix. > > > Not really. > > No, really, I promise it will. :) Each time we upgrade autoconf, it will > break a bunch of packages that were doing things that weren't supported. Ah, that is a point. But that should not be the case if the packages build-depend on the right version, or is it still a problem? I know automake in particular changes a lot between versions, but that's why I always build-depend on a version (such as "automake1.10"). That's recommended as well AFAIK. So the problem of removing old versions of automake (such as automake1.8 at the moment) gets bigger, but it shouldn't make it FTBFS bugs most of the time. > > Yes, IMO it's one of those situations where Debian should do what's > > Right, not what's Easy (similar to what I wrote about the /bin/sh > > bash->dash move on -policy today). > > I am generally in favor of that, but I also don't have the free time to > volunteer for the release team, who ends up bearing the brunt of us doing > the right thing in this area, so, y'know, easy for me to say. :) I'm happy to report bugs and provide patches for many packages if that helps doing this properly. > > That's in principle a problem for the maintainer to solve, and > > secundarily for lintian. > > Well, yeah, but it would still be nice to provide some help. Sure. :-) Thanks, Bas -- I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org). If you have problems reading my e-mail, use a better reader. Please send the central message of e-mails as plain text in the message body, not as HTML and definitely not as MS Word. Please do not use the MS Word format for attachments either. For more information, see http://pcbcn10.phys.rug.nl/e-mail.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature