dpatch on Makefile.in?

[Martin Pitt]

Hi Magnus!

Magnus Therning [2005-06-21 14:09 +0100]:
> Should a distribution specific patch modify Makefile.in or Makefile.am?

I prefer to patch Makefile.am and regenerate Makefile.in since it is
cleaner and the .am file is the "actual source".

> My personal preference would be modify Makefile.am instead and have a
> specific patch (e.g. 99_autoreconf) that is applied as the very last
> one.

This is in fact done that way in many packages. However, if the fix is
very small, and the changed text is the same in .am and .in (e. g.
adding a new supported translation language), it is also a common
habit to just patch .am and .in in the same dpatch.

Martin

-- 
Martin Pitt        http://www.piware.de
Ubuntu Developer   http://www.ubuntu.com
Debian Developer   http://www.debian.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20050621/74600cac/attachment.pgp