Am Montag, den 17.06.2013, 11:39 +0300 schrieb Oron Peled: > On Monday 17 June 2013 02:13:06 Sérgio Basto wrote: > > Hi, > > I'm trying follow this (aarch64 support) but > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=922257#c1 > > > > "could/should be closed now, as this is done automatically from % > > configure", so no need update it anymore ? > > > > we had updated dpkg some major versions sine bug opened, how I know if > > dpkg is now ready for aarch64 ? > > When I fixed one of my packages (libhocr), I chose a different fix: > * Added: BuildRequires: autoconf, automake, libtool, pkgconfig > * In "%prep" added: autoreconf --install --force > > IMO this is better then the new rpm kludge: > * In autotools based projects, the tarball contain *many* generated files. > (e.g: configure, config.h.in, config.{guess,sub}, INSTALL, etc.} > > * The only reason they are in the tarball is to enable build without > the autotools suite (e.g: on other platforms) > > * As such, these files are not [and should not be] committed to version > control systems. > > * So although they are packages in the source tarball, they are no > part of the package real "source" -- they just happen to > come from the platform of the one who maintain the source tarball. > (via "make dist") > > * The "autoreconf" solution let autotools handle this complete problem > without trying to mess in its internals (rpm replacing only some files). > > * As an example how wrong it is for rpm macros to interfere with the > internal logic of autotools, you could have a look in %GNUconfigure > macro in /usr/lib/rpm/macros. This one, tries to second guess > autoconf behavior, but it still search for "configure.in" files. > (For those who don't know -- while these files are still supported, > most modern packages correctly renamed them to "configure.ac"). > > In the Fedora spirit of "everything buildable from clean sources", I think > the "autoreconf" solution should be globally adopted (regardless of aarch64): > * It doesn't use generated files as input to the build process. > * It delegates the actual management to where it belongs. > > Bye, > > -- > Oron Peled Voice: +972-4-8228492 > oron@xxxxxxxxxxxx http://users.actcom.co.il/~oron > "In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is." > -- Yogi Berra > Hi Oron! I completely agree to this. Using `autoreconf -fi` in %build or %prep should be mandatory in packages using autotools. This will surely avoid lots of possible problems caused by just injecting config.{guess,sub} by %configure. Cheers, Björn
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
