[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Hampson) writes: > The arguments _for_ build-depending on the various autotools are (off > the top of my head) > > (In the below, read autoconf as autoconf/automake. ^_^) > > * keeps .diff.gz small and readable, as configure changes are > not included. And small configure.in changes cascade into many > configure changes > * This is a maintainer decision, really. Not _wrong_ per se. > > * timestamp skew means that the autobuilt makefiles will try > to rebuild configure from configure.in even if configure is patched by > dpkg-source at the same time as configure.in > * A solution for this is in the above-mentioned README.Debian
Once more autobuilders switch to 2.6 kernels this will happen even more often. Till now a lot of buggy sources just got lucky during build. > * Upstream distributes without generated files (eg. CVS pull) > or with generated files using older or buggier versions of the > autotools. > * In this case, pristine source tarball means pre-autoconf, > and the maintainer again wants to keep the .diff.gz small. Personaly I prefer the autotools-dev solution with proper timestamp fixes in debian/rules. That means that the package will be build with the same scripts on all hosts except for config.{guess,sub}. That is most likely to succeed. Second place is sources with a Build-Depend on automake/autoconf and no generated files in the source. That avoids timestamp skews even when a buildd is a few timezones in the past compared to the upload. Anything else fails randomly. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]