[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 20:42:23 +0100 |
Hi Albert,
On 26 Aug 2005, at 16:38, Albert Chin wrote:
On Fri, Aug 26, 2005 at 04:26:57PM +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
* 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.
When will HEAD be able to bootstrap with the latest released
autoconf/automake?
Just as soon as autoconf and automake put out new releases ;-)
But really, we would have to back out a lot of patches from libtool
HEAD (including another major reorganisation of the source tree)
to make that work. And the whole point of dropping branch-2-0
is to bring a 2.0 release closer. The 3 patches I attached to an
earlier mail are not too onerous. With those applied to autoconf-2.59
and automake-1.9.6, you can bootstrap right now.
Cheers,
Gary.
--
Gary V. Vaughan ())_. gary@
{lilith.warpmail.net,gnu.org},address@hidden
Research Scientist ( '/ http://www.tkd.kicks-ass.net
GNU Hacker / )= http://www.gnu.org/software/{libtool,m4}
Technical Author `(_~)_ http://sources.redhat.com/autobook
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part