Hi Paul, On Mon, 2011-07-04 at 09:59 +0100, Paul Wise wrote: > On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 7:49 AM, Kilian Krause <kil...@debian.org> wrote: > > > 1. Using dh-autoreconf is ugly. Please try to avoid it and backport the > > full regenerated configure in your patch to make sure the source is > > identical on all buildds. IMHO dh-autoreconf is a solution for a local > > build that you maintain for yourself outside of Debian, but not for an > > official pacakge. > > What do you base this statement on? > > IMO being able to modify and rebuild the build system on Debian is > just as essential to our users as being able to modify and rebuild the > programs and documentation etc. Using dh-autoreconf helps ensure that > we learn about failures early, especially since some Debian QA folks > do periodic archive-wide rebuilds and report FTBFS bugs.
I do remember these "funny" situations where you autoconf with another version and/or another setup than upstream and configure was generated but broken. Thus all I was saying is that configure shouldn't be among those files dynamically generated on the buildd based on an unknown (at least in this regard) setup. -- Best regards, Kilian -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1309774994.5463.64.ca...@rusty.rus.uni-stuttgart.de
