an update to automake-1.11?

[Sam Varshavchik]

Mark McLoughlin writes:

> On Tue, 2009-07-07 at 07:14 -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
>> > libguestfs is a case in point - the Debian maintainer builds it from
>> > git using some unknown version of autoconf, and I build it on RHEL and
>> 
>> This is a rare exception.
> 
> No, it's a rare exception for project to keep autotools generated files
> in version control.
> 
> Yet people still build lots of projects from version control on a
> variety of different distros using different versions of autotools.

I'm sure that there are some folks who do that. But, the overwhelming 
majority of folks want to compile some stable result, rather than the 
greatest and the latest, which may not even compile at all.

Presumably, those who want to build straight out of the upstream repo, have 
sufficient skills and experience to deal with autotools.

> I'm also making the point that maintainers build tarballs without paying
> much attention to the versions of autotools they're using.

I don't get that impression. When I end up upgrading, as a result of the 
entire distro upgrade, or otherwise, to a new autotools, I make sure that I 
go through my existing configure scripts with a fine-toothed comb. Every 
time this happens I always end up tweaking something, making sure to replace 
obsoleted macros with their replacements, etc… But I can only speak for 
myself.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20090707/7cb9bd87/attachment.bin