Re: OpenDKIM v2.0.0 aftermath

From: Mike Markley <mike_at_markley.org>
Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2010 17:11:21 -0800

Just out of curiosity... where are you doing releases? That is, where's
the checkout/export and make dist being done?

The reason I ask: I'm rolling the .deb for 2.0.0 and running into some
issues I thought were now solved==namely, around config.sub and
config.guess versions.

When I do an export on rel-opendkim-2-0-0 and do an autoreconf -i,
configure, and make dist (or distcheck), I get a tarball with config.sub
and config.guess only in build-aux, and perfectly modern versions of
them. However, the released tarball has them both in the top-level
source directory and in build-aux, and they're ancient enough that
I can't upload it to Debian without having a bug immediately filed by
the teams who build for other arches:

$ rm opendkim-2.0.0.tar.gz
$ wget -q http://downloads.sourceforge.net/project/opendkim/opendkim-2.0.0.tar.gz
$ c=`tar tzf opendkim-2.0.0.tar.gz | egrep "config\.(sub|guess)"`
$ tar xzf opendkim-2.0.0.tar.gz $c
$ grep "^timestamp=" $c
opendkim-2.0.0/config.guess:timestamp='2003-07-02'
opendkim-2.0.0/config.sub:timestamp='2003-07-04'
opendkim-2.0.0/build-aux/config.guess:timestamp='2003-07-02'
opendkim-2.0.0/build-aux/config.sub:timestamp='2003-07-04'

(Don't know if I would've caught this before release if I'd been using
the beta tarballs for testing. It's quite likely, though, so I'll try
next time around.)

I'm okay with "fixing" this with an autoreconf just for Debian, despite
the fact that I'll be fending off complaints for purists with that
approach. If we nail it down for the next release, though, then I can
fend them off all the more easily.

-- 
Mike Markley <mike_at_markley.org>
Received on Sun Mar 07 2010 - 01:11:32 PST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Mon Oct 29 2012 - 23:32:52 PST