On 3 October 2013 15:15, dann frazier <email address hidden> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 4:41 AM, Dmitrijs Ledkovs <email address hidden> wrote:
>> Review: Needs Fixing
>>
>> This package is already using dh, and instead of including a static patch to update config.{sub,guess} one would ideally automate it, e.g with "dh $@ --with autoreconf" and adding a Build-dep on dh-autoreconf. This is far more minimal patch, which is also suitable to be forwarded to Debian.
>>
>> I think I will simply upload "--with autoreconf" patch and forward the bug to debian.
>
>
> Sounds good. Note that the bug has been forwarded to Debian already,
> so you can just update my patch there.
yeap, noted. waiting for my upload to be accepted, before updating the
debian bug report.
I also commited on to branches & sponsored your various exynos5440 fixes.
On 3 October 2013 15:15, dann frazier <email address hidden> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 4:41 AM, Dmitrijs Ledkovs <email address hidden> wrote:
>> Review: Needs Fixing
>>
>> This package is already using dh, and instead of including a static patch to update config.{sub,guess} one would ideally automate it, e.g with "dh $@ --with autoreconf" and adding a Build-dep on dh-autoreconf. This is far more minimal patch, which is also suitable to be forwarded to Debian.
>>
>> I think I will simply upload "--with autoreconf" patch and forward the bug to debian.
>
>
> Sounds good. Note that the bug has been forwarded to Debian already,
> so you can just update my patch there.
yeap, noted. waiting for my upload to be accepted, before updating the
debian bug report.
I also commited on to branches & sponsored your various exynos5440 fixes.
Regards,
Dmitrijs.