On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 10:00 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Orcan Ogetbil writes:
> On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 2:24 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
>>
>> [cut]
>> Patching the configure
>> script is much safer than patching configure.ac, then have autoconf grok
>> all
>> .m4 macros and rebuild the whole thing, likely ending up with a
>> completely
>> different beast, that not only includes your changes but who knows what
>> else.
>>
>
> What else? You and some other people are defending this from the
> beginning of this thread but no one explained what else might change.
> If I patch configure.ac and Makefile.am, then run autotools and build
> the RPM package that way, what else might go in unnoticed?
Why are you asking me? I'm the one arguing against patching configure.ac and
Makefile.am and rerunning autotools.
> Please back up your claims. I do not have much knowledge to make
> claims in either direction but I am willing to learn.
You can start by reading this thread, again.
No, I believe that you are the one who needs to read again. :)
Read my post. I know that you are against patching configure.ac and I
ask you what might go wrong unnoticed if you do patch configure.ac.
Example cases? please!
Orcan