On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Andreas Tille <andr...@an3as.eu> wrote:
> Sorry, I was not precise. I also regard Makefile.in and configure (and > files which are used by configure to run properly) as useful in an > upstream tarball. However, files like config.log etc. should be cleaned > up. Agreed. That would usually not be something that would cause enough problems for a new tar.gz to be warranted though. > I mean cases were the process: > > tar -xzf *.orig.tar.gz > cd <upstream-dir> > make clean (or make distclean whatever is used) > > leads to a different directory layout than it is provided in the > tarball. For sure I would try to contact upstream but this does not > always work (dead upstream, unresponsive upstream). > > Simply rebuilding the cleaned source as orig.tar.gz would be a quite > simple way to handle issues like this. ... > If you try to build the source twice in a row you get a diff to the > original tarball. This should be avoided. I would just have `debian/rules clean` remove the (re-)generated files as per usual. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/aanlktikk7zpgawu70ihpx5naa_ghptmpvuvpcfszi...@mail.gmail.com
