autoconf and epel-5

Michael Schwendt mschwendt at gmail.com
Thu Feb 26 09:47:07 UTC 2009


On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 06:20:47 +0100, Ralf wrote:

> Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 04:24:16AM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> >> PEBKAC
> > 
> > [which means "Problem Exists Between Keyboard And Chair"]
> 
> Correct - I didn't mean to offend Tom, but it's obvious, that some 
> people around in this thread don't understand the autotools.
> 
> If people were understanding them, they would not run the autotools 
> inside of rpm.specs but would apply patches.

Patches? ... Patches created by regenerating modified autotools
input files?

That won't be different from running autotools at build-time. With one
exception: you get a chance to examine the patch and verify it and the
results it produces -- you can't do that with unattended rebuilds in a
build system where the autotools versions may change any time and cause
unexpected side-effects.

Anyway, in general I agree. Better prepare patch files. Relying on
arbitrary autotools versions and "autoreconf" to create good and
compatible output bears a risk. It depends on what projects you need to
patch, on the complexity of the autotools input files, and on whether they
make poor assumptions (or access variables they ought not).




More information about the devel mailing list