an update to automake-1.11?

[yersinia]

On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 6:45 PM, Braden McDaniel <braden at endoframe.com>wrote:

> On Tue, 2009-07-07 at 01:17 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> > On 07/06/2009 08:09 PM, Braden McDaniel wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2009-07-06 at 16:36 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> > >> On 07/06/2009 03:57 PM, Braden McDaniel wrote:
> > >>> On 7/6/09 6:10 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> [snip]
> > >>>
> > >>>> Introducing side-effects is something to watch out for but
> > >>>> patching configure instead of the true source is a short term fix,
> not a
> > >>>> long term solution.
> > >>>
> > >>> *Any* patch should be viewed as a short-term fix.  A patch that needs
> to
> > >>> persist indefinitely suggests broken maintainership somewhere along
> the
> > >>> line--either upstream, of the Fedora package in question, or
> elsewhere
> > >>> in Fedora's infrastructure.
> > >>>
> > >> <nod> But one of those patches is upstreamable and the other is not.
> > >> The upstreamable patch is a step on the road to the long term fix.
>  The
> > >> non-upstreamable one is a dead-end.
> > >
> > > Creating a patch to configure/Makefile.in in no way precludes a package
> > > maintainer from sending an analogous patch to configure.ac/Makefile.am
> > > upstream.  So, yes, it's a "dead end" that:
> > >
> > >      1. reduces the size of the changeset between the upstream package
> > >         and the one Fedora actually builds and
> > >      2. improves the resiliency of the package build to changes to
> > >         Fedora's autotools chain.
> > >
> > Perhaps but it doesn't decrease the work that the maintainer has to do.
>
> It very well might if Fedora upgrades to a new autoconf, automake, or
> libtool that is not 100% backward compatible with the previous version.
>

It is not hard at all to have ALL the version of autotool installed. Simply
pick one
(for example for automake) version for the default (for example 1.10 ) and
call
this package automake. If you want also automake 1.11 package this as
automake-1.11 rpm
and, if the developer want, it is its choice, use this instead of the
default via the autotool env var. I do this in RHEL
also for libtool 2.2 ecc.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20090709/17e13066/attachment.htm>