Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> Wrong, as usual.
That's an ad hominem "argument".
> Since each autoconf macro typically expands out to hundreds lines of
> shellcode,
But those hundreds of lines of shellcode *CHANGE* with the autoconf and/or
aclocal version! Even if upstream changes *nothing* in configure.ac, those
lines *will* change whenever they use a different version of the autotools.
For most upstreams, that will happen much more often than some actual change
in configure.ac in the immediate context of what you're patching.
> with the autoconf macro's parameter embedded somewhere in the
> middle of all that stuff, were you to change a parameter to an autoconf
> macro in configure.ac, and upstream changes the parameter in the next
> line, your patch gets broken.
Upstream is much less likely to change that parameter in the next line than
to use a different version of autoconf. Chances are those context lines
won't be touched for YEARS! It's just basic Statistics.
> Yes, tell me again how conflicting patches to neighboring lines in
> configure.ac "works", while the equivalent two patches hundreds of lines
> apart in configure do not.
You don't understand me, I'm telling you how patches to configure.ac in an
area upstream is unlikely to touch any time soon work, while the equivalent
patches in configure get fuzzed by unrelated changes introduced by a new
autoconf used by upstream and break.
> Stuff like AC_PATH_PROG produces several dozens lines of canned shellcode,
> with the arguments to AC_PATH_PROG appearing once, in the middle of them.
But those "several dozens lines of canned shellcode" CHANGE WITH THE
AUTOCONF VERSION!
> Changing the parameter to AC_PATH_PROG, for example, does not change
> hundreds of lines of shellcode.
No, but using the next point release of autoconf, even with no changes to
configure.ac at all, does.
Most programmers use fast-moving distros. Distros like Fedora, Debian
testing/unstable, Gentoo (even masked packages sometimes) etc. There are
even upstream developers using Rawhide! So the version of autoconf upstream
is using will change extremely often. Much more often than a 5-line window
in configure.ac.
Your flawed assumption is that all upstreams are as conservative with
autotools upgrades as you are.
Kevin Kofler
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
