[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: expected Autoconf 2.59 <-> 2.60 compatibility?
From: |
Noah Misch |
Subject: |
Re: expected Autoconf 2.59 <-> 2.60 compatibility? |
Date: |
Tue, 9 May 2006 19:17:17 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.6i |
On Tue, May 09, 2006 at 05:26:12PM -0700, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> Autoconf 2.50 was a major change, with a long development cycle,
> that had plenty of incompatibility with older releases, so that
> when I packaged it for Debian I kept a compatibility package
> around for Autoconf 2.13. This seems to be what other distros
> and operating systems did as well.
>
> Autoconf 2.60 has had a long development cycle too, but I'm
> hoping that it is not sufficiently different from 2.59 to make it
> necessary to package it separately from 2.59. I'm basing this
> mostly on the NEWS, which primarily lists new macros. However,
> it does list some behavioral changes as well, e.g. the change in
> the expansion of @top_builddir@ and the behavior of
> AC_SUBST_FILE.
>
> Does anyone have input on whether these changes are cumulatively
> important enough to break much software?
We tried to preserve compatibility fairly well. If a change broke several
existing `configure.ac', I would rather fix the problem and release Autoconf
2.61 than recommend dual distribution of Autoconf 2.59 and Autoconf 2.60.
- expected Autoconf 2.59 <-> 2.60 compatibility?, Ben Pfaff, 2006/05/09
- Re: expected Autoconf 2.59 <-> 2.60 compatibility?,
Noah Misch <=
- Re: expected Autoconf 2.59 <-> 2.60 compatibility?, Ben Pfaff, 2006/05/09
- Re: expected Autoconf 2.59 <-> 2.60 compatibility?, Ben Pfaff, 2006/05/09
- Re: expected Autoconf 2.59 <-> 2.60 compatibility?, Eric Blake, 2006/05/10
- Re: expected Autoconf 2.59 <-> 2.60 compatibility?, Paul Eggert, 2006/05/10
- Re: expected Autoconf 2.59 <-> 2.60 compatibility?, Ralf Wildenhues, 2006/05/10
- Re: expected Autoconf 2.59 <-> 2.60 compatibility?, Ben Pfaff, 2006/05/10
- Re: expected Autoconf 2.59 <-> 2.60 compatibility?, Ben Pfaff, 2006/05/13
- Re: expected Autoconf 2.59 <-> 2.60 compatibility?, Paul Eggert, 2006/05/14
- Re: expected Autoconf 2.59 <-> 2.60 compatibility?, Ben Pfaff, 2006/05/14
Re: expected Autoconf 2.59 <-> 2.60 compatibility?, Ralf Wildenhues, 2006/05/10