fedora-devel-list
[Prev] Thread [Next] | [Prev] Date [Next]
Re: Status of libtool 2.2.X? Till Maas Mon Oct 13 02:00:39 2008
On Sat October 11 2008, Dan Nicholson wrote: > I said that you should patch configure.ac so that you can actually > send a patch upstream, like a good consumer would do. Patching a Afaik, it is best practices to create a patch for upstream agains configure.ac, then run autoreconf etc. locally and then create a diff between the upstream tarball and the new contents and use this in the spec file, which would be a patch agains configure. Then you do not need to run autoreconf in rpmbuild. Regards, Till
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
- Re: CMake!, (continued)
- Re: CMake! Debarshi Ray
- Re: CMake! Ralf Corsepius
- Re: Status of libtool 2.2.X? Braden McDaniel
- Re: Status of libtool 2.2.X? Dan Nicholson
- Re: Status of libtool 2.2.X? Braden McDaniel
- Re: Status of libtool 2.2.X? Richard W.M. Jones
- Re: Status of libtool 2.2.X? Dan Nicholson
- Re: Status of libtool 2.2.X? Kevin Kofler
- Re: Status of libtool 2.2.X? Braden McDaniel
- Re: Status of libtool 2.2.X? Dan Nicholson
- Re: Status of libtool 2.2.X? Till Maas <=
- Re: Status of libtool 2.2.X? Kevin Kofler
- Re: Status of libtool 2.2.X? Till Maas
- Re: Status of libtool 2.2.X? Kevin Kofler
- Re: Status of libtool 2.2.X? Till Maas
- Re: Status of libtool 2.2.X? Braden McDaniel
- Re: Status of libtool 2.2.X? D. Hugh Redelmeier
- Re: Status of libtool 2.2.X? Braden McDaniel
- Re: Status of libtool 2.2.X? Braden McDaniel
- Re: Status of libtool 2.2.X? Karsten Hopp
- Re: Status of libtool 2.2.X? Dan Nicholson