[Top][All Lists]

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

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

From: Gary V. Vaughan
Subject: Re: CVS branch-2-0 R.I.P.
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 15:24:13 +0100

Hi Peter,

On 26 Aug 2005, at 15:06, Peter Ekberg wrote:
Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
Unless someone yells to the contrary real soon
now, I see no reason to continue to maintain branch-2-0 from
here on in.

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?

I've just successfully run 'make distcheck' on current libtool
HEAD on darwin, using very lightly patch autoconf-2.59, and
automake-1.9.6 (patches attached).  The resulting libtool
tarball should be installable and useable with considerably
older versions of the other autotools (there is a small series
of automake CVS revisions that won't work, but no released
versions... except possibly the extremely ancient).

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

Agreed.  Infact, apart from those of us bootstrapping a libtool
release, it is a bug for an installed released libtool (including
libtoolize) to require non-released autotools.

-- Gary V. Vaughan ())_. gary@ {,},address@hidden
Research Scientist   ( '/
GNU Hacker           / )={libtool,m4}
Technical Author   `(_~)_

Attachment: autoconf-2.59--patch-1--honour-libobj-dir.patch
Description: Binary data

Attachment: autoconf-2.59--patch-2--darwin-fortran-crt2-fix.patch
Description: Binary data

Attachment: automake-1.9.6--patch-1--honour-libobj-dir.patch
Description: Binary data

Attachment: PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

reply via email to

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