Re: Calling autoconf in a spec.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

To: devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Calling autoconf in a spec.
From: Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2011 22:32:28 +0200
Delivered-to: devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Followup-to: gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.devel
Reply-to: Development discussions related to Fedora <devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: KNode/4.4.11

drago01 wrote:
> Exactly patching generated code is just wrong period.

+1. It's also a violation of the GPL (for GPLed projects), because you 
aren't changing the preferred form for modification.

        Kevin Kofler

-- 
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Calling autoconf in a spec.
  - From: Sam Varshavchik

References:
- Calling autoconf in a spec.
  - From: Ankur Sinha
- Re: Calling autoconf in a spec.
  - From: Tom Lane
- Re: Calling autoconf in a spec.
  - From: Sam Varshavchik
- Re: Calling autoconf in a spec.
  - From: Tom Lane
- Re: Calling autoconf in a spec.
  - From: drago01

Prev by Date: Re: Comaintaining and/or help for qucs and freehdl
Next by Date: Re: Calling autoconf in a spec.
Previous by thread: Re: Calling autoconf in a spec.
Next by thread: Re: Calling autoconf in a spec.
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Fedora Announce] [Fedora Kernel] [Fedora Testing] [Fedora Formulas] [Fedora PHP Devel] [Kernel Development] [Fedora Legacy] [Fedora Maintainers] [Fedora Desktop] [PAM] [Red Hat Development] [Gimp] [Yosemite News]

Powered by Linux