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

Re: Suggested packaging guideline: avoid running autoreconf

Le dimanche 12 octobre 2008 à 00:34 -0400, Braden McDaniel a écrit :
> On Sun, 2008-10-12 at 02:25 +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote:

> > > > So how are the autotools different from GCC and Binutils?
> > > 
> > > Source packages produced by an autotools build are designed to be
> > > buildable in the absence of the autotools themselves.  They are not
> > > designed to be buildable without a compiler and POSIX environment.
> > 
> > That distinction is artificial, you're defining "building" to include the 
> > compilation step for the code, but not the one for the build system.
> I'm defining "building" to include whatever steps are *necessary* to
> generate an RPM.  Rebuilding the build system scripts is not necessary
> and can, in general, be avoided.  Avoiding this step is desirable
> because undertaking it causes well-documented problems.

So if Oracle was freely redistributable tomorrow an rpm that just put
the pre-generated Oracle files in the right place would be ok with you?

Fedora is about free software and that means the ability to rebuild
everything from the ground up even when upstream disagrees or when it's
inconvenient to do so. When all is said you can never be 100% sure this
ability is retained unless you perform the full rebuild steps in the
spec file yourself.

Nicolas Mailhot

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée

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