-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: William A. Rowe, Jr.
Gesendet: Samstag, 29. November 2008 04:06
An: dev@httpd.apache.org
Betreff: Re: Preferred versions of libtool and autoconf for TR
Ruediger Pluem wrote:
Any objections going with autoconf 2.63 and libtool 1.5.26?
If
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group ]
Gesendet: Samstag, 29. November 2008 15:19
An: dev@httpd.apache.org
Betreff: Re: Preferred versions of libtool and autoconf for TR
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: William A. Rowe, Jr.
Gesendet: Samstag,
On Nov 28, 2008, at 6:28 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote:
What are our preferred versions of autoconf and libtool for TR on
the weekend?
As far as I remember autoconf 2.61 had some problems.
Actually, it was 2.62 which had problems. 2.61 is preferred.
On Nov 28, 2008, at 4:05 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
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
2008-11-29 15:49:36 Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group napisał(a):
-Urspr�ngliche Nachricht-
Von: Pl�m, R�diger, VF-Group ]
Gesendet: Samstag, 29. November 2008 15:19
An: dev@httpd.apache.org
Betreff: Re: Preferred versions of libtool and autoconf for TR
-Urspr�ngliche
On 11/29/2008 08:17 PM, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
2008-11-29 15:49:36 Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group napisał(a):
-Urspr�ngliche Nachricht-
Von: Pl�m, R�diger, VF-Group ]
Gesendet: Samstag, 29. November 2008 15:19
An: dev@httpd.apache.org
Betreff: Re: Preferred versions
2008-11-29 22:47:45 Ruediger Pluem napisał(a):
On 11/29/2008 08:17 PM, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
2008-11-29 15:49:36 Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group napisał(a):
-Urspr�ngliche Nachricht-
Von: Pl�m, R�diger, VF-Group ]
Gesendet: Samstag, 29. November 2008 15:19
An:
What are our preferred versions of autoconf and libtool for TR on the weekend?
As far as I remember autoconf 2.61 had some problems.
Regards
Rüdiger
Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote:
What are our preferred versions of autoconf and libtool for TR 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
-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 TR
Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote:
What are our preferred versions of autoconf and libtool for
TR on
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 TR
Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote:
What are our preferred versions of
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 TR
Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group
Ruediger Pluem wrote:
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.
I see no remaining issues for 2.63... solid choice. The endianess
issues of 2.62 should all be addressed.
13 matches
Mail list logo