tracking upstream's git repo and autotools

[Pierre Habouzit]

On Sat, Feb 16, 2008 at 11:58:02PM +0000, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Pierre Habouzit <pierre.habouzit at m4x.org> writes:
> 
> >   It takes a lot of time, and prevents builds repeatability, in the
> > sense that when autotools have backward compatibility issues, it breaks,
> > not to mention that you need all the *.m4 files around to generate the
> > configure properly.
> 
> I tend to be on the side that says that the input files to autotools are
> the real source and it's usually better to build the whole package from
> source, particularly when upstream isn't shipping pre-built files for
> convenience.
> 
> It does mean that part of the build process is arch-independent, but
> generally running the autotools doesn't take *that* long compared to the
> actual compilation, and it's hardly the only arch-independent part of
> package builds we have.

  Well, tell that to arm or m68k buildds. On some KDE packages,
autoconfiguring can *literally* take hours.

-- 
·O·  Pierre Habouzit
··O                                                madcoder at debian.org
OOO                                                http://www.madism.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/vcs-pkg-discuss/attachments/20080217/b6349544/attachment.pgp