httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ruediger Pluem <rpl...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Preferred versions of libtool and autoconf for T&R
Date Fri, 28 Nov 2008 21:05:19 GMT


On 11/28/2008 06:35 PM, Rainer Jung wrote:
> Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group schrieb:
>>  
>>
>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>>> Von: Paul Querna  
>>> Gesendet: Freitag, 28. November 2008 17:55
>>> An: dev@httpd.apache.org
>>> Betreff: Re: Preferred versions of libtool and autoconf for T&R
>>>
>>> Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote:
>>>> What are our preferred versions of autoconf and libtool for 
>>> T&R on the weekend?
>>>> As far as I remember autoconf 2.61 had some problems.
>>> I'm not actually sure now days what specific version should 
>>> be used, I 
>>> haven't done RM in a while :-/
>>>
>>> Just make sure you use a local copy, hand compiled version, not 
>> That was my plan. Jim what versions did you use last time?
> 
> The generated files in the httpd distribution and also in the bundled
> apr/apr-util tell us it was autoconf 2.61 and libtool 1.5.26.
> 
> There was a short discussion about autoconf versions and apr and httpd
> releasing before 2.2.10:
> 
> http://marc.info/?t=122168206000001&r=1&w=2
> 
> The technical reasons for nit chosing 2.62 are contained in the
> discussion starting with your mail
> 
> http://marc.info/?l=apr-dev&m=121814441110258&w=2

Thanks for the pointers.
Any objections going with autoconf 2.63 and libtool 1.5.26?

If autoconf 2.63 is seen as too risky I would go back to autoconf 2.61.

Regards

Rüdiger


Mime
View raw message