Mail Archives: cygwin/2001/09/09/19:47:28
James Youngman wrote:
>>Thus, Automake 1.5 broke my bootstrap script and does not allow me
>>to compile Eleanor without problems any more. My questions are:
>>
>
> I have also had to downgrade this stuff, becuase the latest version of
> autoconf insists on using config.sub even if all you want to do is
> figure out the value of EXEHDR. Previous versions of autoconf didn't
> require that. The problem is that the current version of automake
> doesn't know to include config.sub even though autoconf needs it :-(
Okay, I'd like for somebody to explain this to me. (Really, I'm
asking). I've seen this in gcc, libiberty, and several other projects
that depend on autotools.
The autoconf people have deprecated 2.13. New development will be based
on autocon-2.52 and later. 2.13 is dead. It is no more. It has ceased
to be. It's expired and gone to meet its maker. Bereft of life, it
rests in peace. Shuffled off this mortal coil. Joined the choir
invisible. Bleedin' deceased. (sorry, got carried away; but wasn't
Monty Python's "The Pet Shop" a *great* sketch?)
The automake people have updated. Their recommended, official version is
1.5, not 1.4.1 or 1.4 or 1.4p2 or whatever.
Now, in both cases there are a few backwards-incompatibilities. Thus,
projects that use the autotools will require some changes in order to
work with the new versions. So why is the first response always to
downgrade back to the old, obsolete versions of the autotools -- instead
of patching the project to use the new autotools (or better, patching
the project with compatibility macros to support both 2.13 and
2.52(autoconf))
I even submitted patches for libiberty to support both versions, but it
was more or less ignored. It seems the response was "we're sticking
with 2.13"
What? Forever?
I don't understand. Help me?
--Chuck
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -