Greetings Helmut! <quote who="Helmut Grohne" date="Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 02:27:03PM +0200"> > I was trying to fix a bug in most that requires modifying configure. > Thus I tried to regenerate it and ... failed.
I'll start by saying that this is a real bug and that I agree that it should be fixed. And thanks so much for notice and submitting it! And for trying to fix the other issue! I'll also say that I'm skeptical about both the severity you've chosen here (serious), about describing this as a FTBFS issue, and about your suggestion that this is a DFSG issue. After all, the package still builds from its source and I think we have everything that upstream has. If there is a serious DFSG issue here, it's not a FTBFS issue but rather a question of whether or not the source package contains the full source in the first place. I'm open to being convinced otherwise but I think it does. If I generate a configure file with autoconf and then modify it by hand in order to create a working build script, I don't I've somehow made it impossible to provide source for that package. I think I'm still providing the preferred form of modification (as the GPL defines source). I agree that that situation is brittle and bad and should be avoided. But I don't think it's a DFSG issue. If this has been discussed elsewhere or if there is Debian policy on this I don't know about, I'd appreciate being pointed to this and I'm happy to defer to this. In the meantime, I'd appreciate help fixing this issue. I'm not likely to have bandwidth for a few more weeks. Regards, Mako -- Benjamin Mako Hill http://mako.cc/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. --GNU Manifesto
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
