autoconf and epel-5

[Michael Schwendt]

On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 10:53:38 +0100, Kevin wrote:

> Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > 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).
> 
> The patches for the generated files are usually huge and full of unrelated
> changes due to some minor patchlevel change of the autotools or the line
> numbers changing in the input files and thus won't apply anymore to the
> next upstream release. So this type of patches is a major PITA to work
> with.

I'm not asking for such patches to become a MUST in the guidelines.