[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: CVS branch-2-0 R.I.P.

From: Ralf Wildenhues
Subject: Re: CVS branch-2-0 R.I.P.
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 16:26:57 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.1i

* Peter Ekberg wrote on Fri, Aug 26, 2005 at 04:06:05PM CEST:
> What is the requirements on the autotools for a libtoolized
> package from HEAD? I heard a rumor that cvs versions were
> required, at least at some point, is that really the case
> or was it just a rumor?

At the moment they are required after a cvs checkout of Libtool HEAD for
building itself.

Packages libtoolized with CVS Libtool do not need CVS Automake/Autoconf.
Packages `libtoolize -ldtl'ed with CVS Libtool /might/ at the moment
need CVS Autotools, but I am not sure.

Any of the restrictions mentioned in the former paragraph must and will
be removed before a stable release.  But that will most likely happen
after removing all other regressions are fixed and the branch point is

And yes, we plan on testing all of this before the release.

> I can personally live with that the person doing the actual
> libtoolize needs cvs-autotools, but the rest of the
> developers on the package should not be required to use
> cvs-autotools.

Neither of them should need this.  Not even people working on the
release branch of Libtool.  Rationale: Libtool is a user of libltdl
and should work similar to other users of libltdl.  If that use needs
CVS Autotools, other packages that use libltdl most likely do, too.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]