From owner-cvs-all Mon Oct 29 8:58:53 2001 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from leviathan.inethouston.net (leviathan.inethouston.net [66.64.12.249]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C585B37B407; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 08:58:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from dwcjr (unknown [66.64.12.254]) by leviathan.inethouston.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9CC210F429; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 10:58:42 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <000901c1609a$f54ed960$fe0c4042@inethouston.net> From: "David W. Chapman Jr." To: "Sheldon Hearn" Cc: , "Will Andrews" , "Maxim Sobolev" , "John Baldwin" , , References: <16774.1004365691@axl.seasidesoftware.co.za> Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/devel/automake Makefile distinfo pkg-plist Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2001 10:58:39 -0600 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > I don't have a problem doing this from now on, its just in the beginning I > > was forced and trained to patch configure.in and I think that's why a lot of > > ports committers do it. If we patch configure instead of configure.in > > though what would we need autoconf for any more? > > Now you're getting it. :-) > > Some software isn't distributed with a configure file at all and > configure.in _must_ be used to generate it. > I'll start patching configure instead now, but I think it should be in the porters handbook somewhere that you should patch configure instead of configure.in, is this something we need to get portmgr's approval from? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message