-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160 On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 01:58:37PM +0200, Frank Lahm wrote: >2009/6/16 Jonas Smedegaard <d...@jones.dk> >> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 11:59:23AM +0200, Frank Lahm wrote: >> >2009/6/16 Jonas Smedegaard <d...@jones.dk> >> >> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 10:33:23AM +0200, Frank Lahm wrote: >> >> >2009/6/16 Itai Seggev <is+deb...@cs.hmc.edu> >> >> >> Any other suggestions? >> >> > >> >> >Although you're only reporting this problem with a rc and the >> >> >final is alread available, whatever causes your error may still >> >> >be present. Therefore I'm digging into this and will be talkin to >> >> >the libtool folks. Stay tuned. >> >> >> >> I believe that this issue can be solved upstream by adding >> >> AM_MAINTAINER_MODE to configure.in and using a more recent libtool >> >> when preparing release tarballs. >> > >> >I've just took another look at Debian list of patches to netatalk. >> >As it seems you're touching configure.in amongst others. I'm not >> >familiar with the workings of the Debian package building tools, but >> >I guess in order for these patches to be applied they must re-run >> >the Autotools toolchain, do they? If they do, it might be an issue >> >in how they do that. >> >> Yes, that might certainly be an issue. And if that is an issue, the >> solution is *not* to compile unpatched code by hand, but to fix that >> issue. > >I was suggesting to _compile_ and see if the issue comes from upstream >or from your patches. I wasn't suggesting to compile and run that >"unpatched code" ! I'm trying to track it down in order to fix it.
Ah, ok. Sorry for misunderstanding. >> You've asked those patches before, and I told you not (as upstream) >> to worry about those pathces to autogenerated files): I agree that >> they are not of concern for upstream. > >But you are *not* patching _generated_ files here. You are patching >configure.in in this case. ?? Bingo! Until recently I regenerating files, and then switched back to applying patches only. I clearly missed that configure.in still got patched. Thanks a lot for spotting this. The error is mine. I will fix this for the next release (where I will also bump to the official upstream release)! >> I believe that the problem here is *not* with those files, however. >> As I wrote already, I beleive it is tied to libtool: Debian use a >> much newer libtool that used upstream, and it seems (also experienced >> in other packages that I maintain) that if libtool acts up (which can >> be suppressed my AM_MAINTAINER_MODE that you sadly do not use >> currently), then too big differences in versions of libtool and >> automake won't work. > >AM_MAINTAINER_MODE might indeed fix this issue, but afaict the problem >is caused because you touch autoconf stuff (configure.in, m4 macros) >and rerun autotools. From my current knowledge, I do not even think that AM_MAINTAINER_MODE would have helped here: I broke the chain, I need to fix it. >> Please note that this Bug Tracker relates to packaged software, not >> upstream. > >Yeah, and bugs that effect upstream have always been reported there >too... I'm just actively digging into this because I'm afraid it might >be some _upstream_ issue. Thanks. And sorry again for my misunderstanding and biting at you. - Jonas - -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEAREDAAYFAko3lhoACgkQn7DbMsAkQLjIewCgoCceFwzU9K9LzyruHix481Lw bCEAn31ssmouLavbBcNBYqKT7HGisQ55 =2j66 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
