* Peter Samuelson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > [Eric Dorland] > > s/autoconf/automake/g > > > > The same is true of automake. > > Good thing that isn't a problem, since you don't Build-Depends: > automake, but rather Build-Depends: automake1.7 or whatever.
But this creates a problem when automake1.7 is three major revisions out of date and should be removed from the archive. Right now every time I do this I have to file hundreds of bugs and do lots of NMUs. I'm not eager to turn this into thousands. So it is already a problem. I agree with your goal in principle, but the autotools just aren't designed to be used that way, and we'll be fighting with them more than actually deriving benefit from doing this. > Or did you mean that new uploads of automake1.7 break packages that > worked with older uploads of automake1.7? Frankly I'd consider that a > failing in your duties as maintainer. -- Eric Dorland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ICQ: #61138586, Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1024D/16D970C6 097C 4861 9934 27A0 8E1C 2B0A 61E9 8ECF 16D9 70C6
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
