On 07 Feb 2012, at 3:45 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote: > I agree 100%. And hopefully we also agree that the order should be > > 1. make the fixes to our code > 2. start using autoconf v2.68 > > Also, that's not a showstopper for a release, so an RM should use the > known-compatible version of autoconf for new releases until any > glitches are resolved.
Warnings are exactly that - warnings. If all we're doing is using a version of autoconf that complains less, but otherwise does nothing different to the current version, we're not achieving anything by doing that. Has anyone gone through the warnings to determine if the warnings should cause concern? Regards, Graham --
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
