On 31 Aug 2001, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
> Eivind Eriksen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Short questions:
> >
> > Why autoconf 2.13 and not 2.52?
>
> Too much trouble in upgrading.
>
>
> > Why automake 1.4 and not 1.5?
>
> Too much trouble in upgrading.
>
>
> > Small pacages, easy to maintain, loads of bugfixes and additional
> > features.
>
> Then can you explain to me why:
>
> [gc@bi ~] ll /rawhide/RPMS/automake-1.4p5-1.noarch.rpm
> -rw-r--r-- 1 mandrake rpm 307951 Jul 21 09:46
>/rawhide/RPMS/automake-1.4p5-1.noarch.rpm
> [gc@bi ~] ll /rawhide/RPMS/autoconf-2.13-14.noarch.rpm
> -rw-r--r-- 1 mandrake rpm 230334 Aug 7 00:28
>/rawhide/RPMS/autoconf-2.13-14.noarch.rpm
>
>
>
>
I also recommend sticking to autoconf 2.13 and automake 1.4. I think the
upgrade to automake 1.5 is a lot less painful than the autoconf 2.5x
upgrade. autoconf 2.50 had tons of bugs, and even if those are generally
fixed now, we still have a problem. "Broken" 2.13 packages won't work with
2.5x. Even if we run the upgrade script by default I wouldn't trust it.
There are too many "broken" packages out there and packages that need
manual upgrading to 2.5x and this is not Mandrake's job. This is why I
fear autoconf 2.5x will never be used unless they provide a compatibility
mode.
--
Sincerely,
David Walluck
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
