an update to automake-1.11?

Till Maas opensource at
Sun Jul 5 14:37:02 UTC 2009

On Sun July 5 2009, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:

> There's been lots of previous discussion of this silly idea of
> patching generated code.  You end up carrying enormous patches
> containing just line number changes that often can't be applied
> upstream, and can't be carried forward to new upstream releases --
> what on earth use is that?  And still no one has explained coherently
> why the sky will fall if we patch and and
> just rerun autoconf/automake in the specfile.

There is also the third alternative to patch and, 
send the patches upstream, then run autoconf/automake once to get a patch for 
the upstream tarball and use this patch inside the spec. The patch in the spec 
may still be big, but it does not hurt anyone afaics.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : 

More information about the devel mailing list