On Sat, 2008-10-11 at 10:44 -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote:
On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 10:26 AM, Braden McDaniel
<braden(a)endoframe.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 2008-10-11 at 08:17 -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote:
>>
>> You always need to run autoconf again if you've patched the
>> configure.ac file, or nothing happens. You can run autoreconf locally
>> and add the regenerated configure/aclocal.m4 to your patch, but it
>> will be severely bloated.
>
> There's no reason to patch aclocal.m4 or configure.ac at all. You only
> need to patch configure. While that patch is likely to be bigger than a
> patch to configure.ac, calling it "bloated" is a gross exaggeration.
You would need to patch aclocal.m4 if you need to pull in another
external macro.
No, you don't. You only need to regenerate configure and generate a
patch for *it*. The normal process of building a package (i.e.,
"configure; make") doesn't use aclocal.m4. It's only used to
regenerate
configure.
I said that you should patch configure.ac so that you can actually
send a patch upstream, like a good consumer would do. Patching a
generated file is just a local fix. Would you patch a file generated
by bison or would you patch the .y file? One of those is "the right
way" and one is not.
Yes, but the kind of patches that should be sent upstream are not the
ones resulting in 300 busted packages from a libtool upgrade. We're
talking about patches applied by a specfile build.
--
Braden McDaniel e-mail: <braden(a)endoframe.com>
<
http://endoframe.com> Jabber: <braden(a)jabber.org>