* quoting myself from Sat, Feb 24, 2007 at 02:25:24PM CET:
FWIW3: We could start to think about how we will number the thing
eventually. 1.9h? 2.1h? 2.1b? And the stable? 2.0? 2.2?
My vote is for 2.1b and 2.2, respectively. Because that way numbers are
monotone.
No more comments.
* Charles Wilson wrote on Sat, Feb 24, 2007 at 07:41:20PM CET:
Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
Please also send tests/testsuite.log (after or before the re-run, both
are interesting). It has more details. Thanks!
old one attached.
Thank you.
13 - FC -- cygwin's gcc is 3.4.4, so it has g77
Charles Wilson wrote:
Here are my results:
It would help to actually attach the test log.
--
Chuck
make check-recursive
make[1]: Entering directory `/usr/src/libtool/20/bob/libtool2.0-2.1a-1/build'
rm -f tests/defs.tmp tests/defs; \
input=defs.m4sh; \
sed -e
Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
Please also send tests/testsuite.log (after or before the re-run, both
are interesting). It has more details. Thanks!
old one attached.
--
Chuck
libtool-HEAD-20070205-cygwin-testsuite.log.bz2
Description: Binary data
