>On 06-06-10 18:15, Magnus Holmgren, Millnet/Lysator/Debian/Mensa @ Pike
>developers forum wrote:
>> If the diff is manageable I prefer to patch configure and avoid
>> depending on and running autoconf. I suppose that's the only reason
>> for the last hunk of rules.diff.
>
>I don't exactly understand what you mean here?
>If configure.in in pike is patched, then for every new stable release
>configure will also be correct thereafter?

It's just that it tends to produce huge diffs when building a package
twice in a row unless all the files created by autoconf are restored
or deleted by debian/rules clean.

>> How do you ensure that pike is installed on the host system before
>> cross-compiling for other architectures?
>
>One could declare a build-dependecy in the control file.
>Otherwise the building process just fails, stating pike is not found.

I'm not sure that packages are allowed to build-depend on themselves,
but I suspect that the same bootstrapping problem may exist with other
packages as well?
            • ... Magnus Holmgren, Millnet/Lysator/Debian/Mensa @ Pike developers forum
        • ... Martin Stjernholm, Roxen IS @ Pike developers forum
          • ... Magnus Holmgren, Millnet/Lysator/Debian/Mensa @ Pike developers forum
            • ... Martin Stjernholm, Roxen IS @ Pike developers forum
    • ... Magnus Holmgren, Millnet/Lysator/Debian/Mensa @ Pike developers forum
      • ... Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) @ Pike (-) developers forum
        • ... Magnus Holmgren, Millnet/Lysator/Debian/Mensa @ Pike developers forum
          • ... Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) @ Pike (-) developers forum
  • Re:... Magnus Holmgren, Millnet/Lysator/Debian/Mensa @ Pike developers forum
  • Re:... Marc Dirix
    • ... Magnus Holmgren, Millnet/Lysator/Debian/Mensa @ Pike developers forum
    • ... Marc Dirix
    • ... Marc Dirix

Reply via email to