Archives
Archives
| From: | Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-project@l.g.o | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Call for Agenda Items -- Council Meeting 2015-11-08 | ||
| Date: | Tue, 27 Oct 2015 19:23:03 | ||
| Message-Id: | 20151027192247.5cd9a212@googlemail.com | ||
| In Reply to: | Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Call for Agenda Items -- Council Meeting 2015-11-08 by hasufell |
||
| 1 | On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 20:11:37 +0100 |
| 2 | hasufell <hasufell@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 | > It's still not clear to me how this is supposed to work at all. Are we |
| 4 | > expected to run eautoreconf unconditionally just in case a user will |
| 5 | > throw in a patch that alters the build system? |
| 6 | |
| 7 | No, you can opt to run it only if user patches were applied. |
| 8 | |
| 9 | > I definitely won't do that, because autoreconf is the source for a |
| 10 | > lot of problems and build failures. |
| 11 | |
| 12 | Well perhaps you should fix them, rather than hoping the problems won't |
| 13 | be noticed. |
| 14 | |
| 15 | -- |
| 16 | Ciaran McCreesh |
| File name | MIME type |
|---|---|
| signature.asc | application/pgp-signature |
| Subject | Author |
|---|---|
| Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Call for Agenda Items -- Council Meeting 2015-11-08 | hasufell <hasufell@g.o> |