Le 09/08/2012 13:04, Jean-Pierre Flori a écrit :
The slight difference is that Debian surely does not care about
requiring autotools, people here might feel differently.
How many of the spkg use autotools?
How many of the spkg have an spkg-install which could be reduced to
calling a common spkg-install-autotools?
And running autotools also takes a small but non negligible amout of
time, for what the same remark apply.
Well, given the choice of either not running autotools thereby failing
sooner or running autotools and succeeding later, I'll choose the last
option -- and that is what the quoted text is about.
And we must also be aware that even if autotools is installed, we cannot
really expet anything about the version and its flavour depending on the
system, which is also easier to deal for Debian I guess (even though
their automake is often outdated).
Well, sage has patch and bzip2 which are very widely available in
non-problematic versions ; why wouldn't it have autotools(+libtool) if
it's those are important?
Snark on #sagemath
--
--
To post to this group, send an email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URL: http://www.sagemath.org
