immanuel litzroth writes:
> Once again... this is biting us too so we usually add the AM_MAINTAINER
> mode ourselves. This scenario is 100% recognizable and a major source of
> problems for us.
I also religiously use AM_MAINTAINER_MODE for all of my packages because I
always want to be able to t
Once again... this is biting us too so we usually add the AM_MAINTAINER
mode ourselves. This scenario is 100% recognizable and a major source
of problems for us.
Immanuel
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 12:37 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò
wrote:
> On 07/02/2013 19:47, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> > So you want to
We have had a lot of problems with this in our company, where I have
to keep explaining the issues involved. So strong agreement here.
Immanuel
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 6:17 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò
wrote:
> On 07/02/2013 16:18, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> > (Side note: using AM_MAINTAINER_MODE these
On 08/02/2013 13:26, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> But maintainer-mode won't help you here; it will just cause make to ignore
> some remake rules that require maintainer tools, so you are *more* likely
> to end up with a subtly and silently broken package (or at least one that
> is in an inconsistent
On 02/08/2013 12:37 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> On 07/02/2013 19:47, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>> So you want to allow users to disable maintainer-mode rules in every
>> package?
>
> Yes. Where users here is "distribution packagers".
>
>> Better risk an extra rebuild than to miss a required one
