Bug#879905: glee: source for GLee.c and GLee.h is missing

[Ximin Luo]

Steve Cotton:
> Source: glee
> Severity: serious
> Justification: missing source (GLeeGen), missing source (GL ext specs)
> 
> GLee already has serious bug #879123, and the auto-removal email
> for dependencies was sent this morning. Most of the discussion in
> #879123 looks as if a .dsfg tarball would just need to remove the
> configure file, I'm logging a new bug so that this doesn't get
> missed:
> 
> On Thu, 19 Oct 2017 22:47:00, Ximin Luo wrote:
>> Unfortunately we have a bigger problem:
>>
>> - 	rwxrwxr-x 	1,105,245 	GLee.c
>> - 	rwxrwxr-x 	955,258 	GLee.h
>>
>> * [This file was automatically generated by GLeeGen 7.0
>>
>> These files are clearly not source code. But luckily it should
>> be possible to regenerate them from the git repo I mentioned:
>>
>>> [..] https://github.com/kallisti5/glee
> 
> It seems that repo is also not the complete source, the build
> steps in CMakeLists.txt download specs for the GL extensions from
>     http://www.opengl.org/registry/
> 
> The Readme.txt mentions a graball.bat, which no longer exists,
> but seems likely to have grabbed from the same place.
> 
> Steve
> 

Thanks for reporting yes. Looks like the previous discussion went on for almost the length of another ./configure file, without CCing me in the process, and ignored this much more serious issue.

I'd also like to reiterate my earlier point:

> To re-iterate my first point though, if in the future this issue crops up
> again, you need to supply evidence that ./configure is "preferred source of
> modification" because that contradicts all other experience of autotools files.
> A git history log of the author hand-editing the file *more times* than
> regenerating the file from configure.ac would suffice.

And likewise for other generated text code like this C source code here.

I see some pedantry in the other bug report about "can modify". Obviously you "can modify" any file that exists on your computer, you can also modify ELF binaries in dirty binary hacks and "I've done this before" as well. (See /home/groups/reproducible/htdocs/patched-libs/libapt-inst.so.1.5.0.patched-xz on alioth). Source code is "*preferred*-form-of-modification", not "form-of-modification".

If one says something like this:

> I have worked with even more configure scripts and I also prefer modifying
> something else.

one already acknowledges that the "something else" is the source code, not the configure script.

Agreed that bug reports should be filed to other packages if they have similar problems. The packages I am responsible for, do not have this issue.

X

-- 
GPG: ed25519/56034877E1F87C35
GPG: rsa4096/1318EFAC5FBBDBCE
https://github.com/infinity0/pubkeys.git