On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 10:00 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote: > Orcan Ogetbil writes: > >> On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 2:24 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote: >>> >>> [cut] >>> Patching the configure >>> script is much safer than patching configure.ac, then have autoconf grok >>> all >>> .m4 macros and rebuild the whole thing, likely ending up with a >>> completely >>> different beast, that not only includes your changes but who knows what >>> else. >>> >> >> What else? You and some other people are defending this from the >> beginning of this thread but no one explained what else might change. >> If I patch configure.ac and Makefile.am, then run autotools and build >> the RPM package that way, what else might go in unnoticed? > > Why are you asking me? I'm the one arguing against patching configure.ac and > Makefile.am and rerunning autotools. > >> Please back up your claims. I do not have much knowledge to make >> claims in either direction but I am willing to learn. > > You can start by reading this thread, again. > > No, I believe that you are the one who needs to read again. :) Read my post. I know that you are against patching configure.ac and I ask you what might go wrong unnoticed if you do patch configure.ac. Example cases? please! Orcan -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
