Alexander Mai wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Aug 2001 15:13:48 +0200, Danny Backx wrote:
>
>
>>I still fail to see why we need to branch. There's not enough people
>>using the CVS version to make this an issue, or at least that's my
>>opinion.
>>
>>Others, please express your opinions !
>>
>
> We could perhaps easily create two source releases, one using
> new, one old auto*
> We don't want other people (auto* authors) to stop
> or disturb LessTif development ...?! I won't and can't
> upgrade (see below) and refuse to install different versions.
> That will cause only additional harm for sure.
>
>
>>Alexander: exactly what is wrong with the newest versions of the
>>auto tools for you ? With which versions and on which platforms ?
>>
>
>
> Ok, once again:
> autoconf fails for ddd, gnuplot, grace (IIRC), etc.
> Actually the number posted from "nix" on the list was 20%,
> for me it's 50%. This is what I call garbage.
> libtool 1.4 requires a macro which autoconf 2.13 doesn't have.
> This only happens here on alpha-linux, but recently I only
> try i86-linux and DU as alternatives. So actually it fails on
> one third of "all tested" systems for me. (the authors even are/were
> not aware of this; also they tend to ignore it)
Why do you want to run autoconf on all thise packages ?. If you want
to compile them, you just run ./configure. As far as i can see, is only
matters if you is the maintainer of theese packages, and changes the
configure.in
Karsten Jensen
