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

Re: Missing dependency problem



On Apr 12, 2005, Alexander Dalloz <ad+lists uni-x org> wrote:

> Having gcc on your system you certainly want libtool too.

Not really.  libtool, as well as autoconf and automake, are designed
to not be necessary for people who build packages, only for people who
modify the package sources, using the tools to update the generated
files that are to be shipped in the package buildable tarball.

Therefore, removing libtool is perfectly reasonable, unless you happen
to be developing a package whose source repository doesn't include
generated files, for example, or that might need libtoolize run for
whatever reason.

I realize a number of spec files do run libtoolize, as well as
aclocal, autoconf, automake, autoheader, autoreconf, etc.  I've long
considered this to be a bug, and recommend patching the sources to
obtain the desired change.  That's what patches are for.  With the
current approach, packages stop building at random because of updates
of autotools, and then people blame autotools, instead of blaming the
packager.

If people took the correct approach, we could even push autotools to
Extras.  I can't think of any legitimate reason to BuildRequiring
them.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva             http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   aoliva {redhat com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist  oliva {lsd ic unicamp br, gnu.org}


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