Prior to ITS#5888 we have been using autoconf 2.59 to generate our configure script. During the commits of #5888 autoconf 2.61 was used. Is there any particular reason to stick to 2.59, or to change to 2.61, at this point in time?
Howard Chu wrote:
Prior to ITS#5888 we have been using autoconf 2.59 to generate our configure script. During the commits of #5888 autoconf 2.61 was used. Is there any particular reason to stick to 2.59, or to change to 2.61, at this point in time?
My distro (CentOS 5.2) ships with 2.61, and I'm just happy with it. As soon as we decide to use a certain tool, we should strive to making our code comply with its development, unless there are good reasons to break it. Of course, having an official version saves lots of formatting nuisance in concurrent commits. I vote for 2.61 as soon as there is no significant drawback.
p.
Ing. Pierangelo Masarati OpenLDAP Core Team
SysNet s.r.l. via Dossi, 8 - 27100 Pavia - ITALIA http://www.sys-net.it ----------------------------------- Office: +39 02 23998309 Mobile: +39 333 4963172 Fax: +39 0382 476497 Email: ando@sys-net.it -----------------------------------
On Mon, 26 Jan 2009, Pierangelo Masarati wrote:
My distro (CentOS 5.2) ships with 2.61, and I'm just happy with it. As soon
Actually, so near as I can tell, RHEL/CentOS are "autoconf-2.59-12." But still...
concurrent commits. I vote for 2.61 as soon as there is no significant drawback.
agreed. Whatever pain we might get from an indepedently-updated autoconf is worth it in the name of upstream improvements/fixes, IMO.
Howard Chu wrote:
Prior to ITS#5888 we have been using autoconf 2.59 to generate our configure script. During the commits of #5888 autoconf 2.61 was used. Is there any particular reason to stick to 2.59, or to change to 2.61, at this point in time?
Not that I know. Also I wonder if other autotool-files can be updated: build/ltmain.sh, build/build/config.guess etc.
IIRC I looked at updating them once, but they are patched versions and I didn't know who patched them for what. Maybe FreeBSD patches from Kurt's machine. Nor could I test if using an unpatched version breaks something.
Anyway, it might be best to use clean autotools when rebuilding config files, to avoid mysteries like that.
On Jan 26, 2009, at 12:52 AM, Howard Chu wrote:
Prior to ITS#5888 we have been using autoconf 2.59 to generate our configure script. During the commits of #5888 autoconf 2.61 was used. Is there any particular reason to stick to 2.59, or to change to 2.61, at this point in time?
I recall there being a problem with some versions of autoconf not properly expanding/evaluating our custom macros... but maybe the problem has gone away.
-- Kurt
-
Aaron Richton -
Hallvard B Furuseth -
Howard Chu -
Kurt Zeilenga -
Pierangelo Masarati