On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 7:58 AM, Ralf Corsepius <rc040203@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >> >> On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 01:07:44PM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: >>> >>> ... plenty of surprises are lurking for you ;) >> >> You really need to back your assertions up with facts. > > OK, try to run autoreconf from Fedora 10 on newlib-1.15.0, gcc-3.x, firefox. > > These packages end up in a total mess when doing so. There actually are > plenty of such cases out there. Almost all packages which still apply > autoconf < 2.59 or automake < 1.7 have such problems. I think the actual policy has to be handled on a case-by-case basis, unfortunately. gcc and firefox have very specific usage patterns for the autotools. They have to be handled with care, which probably means patching the generated files or simulating the behavior of the upstream bootstrap.sh/autogen.sh/whatever. IIRC, apr and xfsprogs (among others) also use the autotools in a non-standard way. On the other hand, all the hundreds of xorg packages are handled with "autoreconf -iv". I certainly understand where you're coming from, but I think the policy should be "use autoreconf if you can". The big benefit being that hopefully fixes can get back upstream so that the game can be avoided with the next release. -- Dan -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
