On Thu, Jun 27, 2002 at 02:38:08PM +0200, J?r?me Marant wrote: > On Thu, Jun 27, 2002 at 02:30:45PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 27, 2002 at 02:21:37PM +0200, J?r?me Marant wrote: > > > > So we can't have a bytecode versione of ocamlsdl, right? > > > > > > Not exactly. The configure script requires ocamlopt currently > > > and Makefile require both bytecode and opt compilers. > > > I think this could be changed by upstream in the future. > > > > In this case: have you tried to change the configure script in the > > debian version so that we can have ocamlsdl also on arch that don't have > > a native code compiler ... > > No, I didn't because it is simply bad practice. We, debian packagers, > must avoid to change configure scripts as much as possible. > The upstream is not even meant to ship tarballs with configure.in > within. Furthermore, Makefile have to be adapted in order to take > this option into consideration.
Well, if upstream ships with broken build scripts, you have to fix it. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
