Sean Finney writes ("Re: Best practice for cleaning autotools-generated files?"): > On Wed, 2011-03-16 at 16:36 +0000, Ian Jackson wrote: > > That's fine, you patch the input, rerun the autofoobar stuff, and then > > build the source package with diff. If you're using a patch queue > > system, or a vcs, you arrange for the autogenerated autofoobar output > > changes to be committed along with the corresponding input change. > > and then you end up with either (a) masses of changes to upstream files > in your local branch which will cause merge conflicts (and > aesthetically, ew, yuck.) or (b) a patch in your patch queue which will > very likely not apply in the next upstream release.
Yes, you get some trivial-to-fix conflicts: you simply rerun autofoobar and the affected files are fixed. > autofoo stuff examines timestamps on various files, so it's possible > that if configure gets patched before configure.ac, and > AM_MAINTAINER_MODE is set to a specific value, that ./configure ends up > wanting to regenerate ./configure at build time. double fail. The package should be configured so that this does not happen. Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/19841.62614.539116.696...@chiark.greenend.org.uk