Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: David Seifert <soap@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] autotools.eclass: automatically move configure.in to configure.ac
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2017 15:24:42
Message-Id: 1497194671.30990.8.camel@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] autotools.eclass: automatically move configure.in to configure.ac by Kristian Fiskerstrand
1 On Sun, 2017-06-11 at 17:12 +0200, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
2 > On 06/11/2017 05:07 PM, Mart Raudsepp wrote:
3 > > Ühel kenal päeval, P, 11.06.2017 kell 10:00, kirjutas William
4 > > Hubbs:
5 > > > On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 01:04:06PM +0100, Sergei Trofimovich
6 > > > wrote:
7 > > > > On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 13:28:19 +0200
8 > > > > Jeroen Roovers <jer@g.o> wrote:
9 > > > >
10 > > > > > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=426262
11 > > > > > + mv configure.{in,ac} || die
12 > > > >
13 > > > > Looks good.
14 > > > >
15 > > > > -- 
16 > > > >
17 > > > >   Sergei
18 > > >
19 > > > -1
20 > > >
21 > > > I think this should be handled by the packages, not at the eclass
22 > > > level.
23 > > >
24 > > > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=426262#c3
25 > > >
26 > > > The packages should either mv the configure.in to configure.ac
27 > > > internally, or better yet, the maintainers should ask upstream
28 > > > for
29 > > > their
30 > > > packages to fix it.
31 > >
32 > > +1, otherwise we will never be able to add/unmask a newer autoconf
33 > > that
34 > > doesn't look at configure.in anymore, once such a version
35 > > eventually
36 > > happens.
37 > >
38 >
39 > We can always patch the eclass at that point if that is still a big
40 > concern, but I fundamentally agree with William on this, starting
41 > point
42 > should be fixing it upstream, so can start with a tracking bug on
43 > affected packages.
44 >
45
46 Here's a deal: you can start filing + fixing them.
47
48 David

Replies