Mailing-List: contact dev-help@apr.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
From: Jim Jagielski <jim@jaguNET.com>
Message-Id: <200205141212.IAA17284@devsys.jaguNET.com>
Subject: Re: can we require libtool 1.4 ?
To: gstein@lyra.org (Greg Stein)
Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 08:12:57 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: dev@apr.apache.org
Reply-To: jim@jaguNET.com
In-Reply-To: <20020514004433.E4932@lyra.org> from "Greg Stein" at May 14,
 2002 12:44:33 AM
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Greg Stein wrote:
> 
> I think it would simplify our life, and give us proper dependencies, yet not
> cause any undue burden (libtool 1.4 has been out for a long while now...)
> 
> >From IRC, I already have a +1 from Justin and Sander. So I'd say we have
> enough positive traction for the move. But does anybody see any *problems*
> or have a reason to *not* require 1.4 ?
> 

I'm a ++1 on requiring 1.4.x as a minumum. From all accounts, the
libtool to be shipped with OSX 10.2 will *still* be 1.3-based, but
the various 1.4.2 Darwin builds (like Pier's) work just fine. Also,
IIRC, doesn't PHP since like 4.1.x require 1.4.2 ?

-- 
===========================================================================
   Jim Jagielski   [|]   jim@jaguNET.com   [|]   http://www.jaguNET.com/
      "A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order
             will lose both and deserve neither" - T.Jefferson