Request for Review: hula
Ed Hill
ed at eh3.com
Tue Apr 26 18:46:52 UTC 2005
On Tue, 2005-04-26 at 20:38 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 14:24:30 -0400, Kevin Gray wrote:
>
> > Michael,
> >
> > Sorry for the delay in responding to your suggestions, I had an issue
> > uploading my package which has now been resolved. I believe the only
> > thing I havent answered is the tarball issue, where you mentioned
> > getting one that doesnt require running the autogen.sh. I do have a
> > question about that if you dont mind. Im just curious to know what the
> > advantage is to doing this.
>
> It is a bug if you must have the tools required by autogen.sh and possibly
> specific versions of those tools. The source code archive should be ready
> to use as soon as it is extracted, so you could call "configure" without
> the need to create the file yourself [by running autogen.sh] beforehand.
> The source code maintainers ought to run autogen.sh prior to creating the
> tarball and publishing it.
Hi Michael,
Just out of curiosity, is there a policy in place for instances where
you'd like to change the way that, say, something is handled in a
Makefile.am (that is, change wrt the upstream)?
What I'm trying to get at is this: does Fedora Extras have a policy that
specifically forbids the use of the auto-tools within spec files?
And if so, does it mean that one should instead supply a new "configure"
script as a patch?
Ed
--
Edward H. Hill III, PhD
office: MIT Dept. of EAPS; Rm 54-1424; 77 Massachusetts Ave.
Cambridge, MA 02139-4307
emails: eh3 at mit.edu ed at eh3.com
URLs: http://web.mit.edu/eh3/ http://eh3.com/
phone: 617-253-0098
fax: 617-253-4464
More information about the fedora-extras-list
mailing list