At 10:50 AM -0600 1/18/00, Gilles Detillieux wrote:
> > Well, now you mention, I did find a --without-zlib so I assumed there
> > was a --with-zlib
>
>3.1.4's configure allows --enable-zlib or --disable-zlib only.
These were the switches I picked. Loic redid the configure script for
3.2 and renamed them. Since they're fairly lightly used, I didn't
think it would be a problem.
>That depends on a couple things:
> 1) that there will even be a 3.1.5. I wanted to get 3.1.x to a stable
>state to fall back on until 3.2.0 matures enough. I think it's there
>now. It's not perfect, but it never will be, and the most glaring
>problems with it now are things that 3.2 should fix, but aren't easily
>back-ported to 3.1.x.
I would tend to agree with Gilles. We've talked about a number of
bugs in 3.1.x that simply cannot be fixed without heavily
back-porting. This is silly--we should be pushing hard to get 3.2.0b1
out the door, not spending time on 3.1.x.
Now if a really critical bug crops up, I'll make sure there's a
3.1.5. But it probably won't include much.
>script in my 3.1 maintenance, because I'm not familiar with autoconf,
>and we don't want to break something this critical at this stage.
The 3.1.x configure script assumes that if you have a zlib, you want
it. That's why there's a --disable, in case you don't.
Does this make sense?
-Geoff
------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the htdig3-dev mailing list, send a message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
You will receive a message to confirm this.
