Calling autoconf in a spec.

[drago01]

On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 7:31 PM, Tom Lane <tgl at redhat.com> wrote:
> Sam Varshavchik <mrsam at courier-mta.com> writes:
>> To add to that: I never recall a single instance where I couldn't fix any
>> breakage in someone else's canned configure/makefile scripts without having
>> to rerun autoconf and automake.
>
>> If there was a problem in the configure script, rather than patching
>> configure.ac or configure.in, I simply patched the configure script itself.
>
> Yeah, and the question is why that's a good idea at all, let alone so
> superior as to be policy.  To me it sounds exactly like arguing that you
> should fix a code bug by patching the emitted assembler code, instead of
> touching the C code.  Or fixing a grammar problem by patching bison's
> output file instead of the input .y file.  It just seems uselessly stone
> age.  And it certainly does not yield a patch that you are going to be
> able to submit to upstream.

Exactly patching generated code is just wrong period.