Re: CVS branch-2-0 R.I.P.

[Gary V. Vaughan]

Hi Albert,

On 26 Aug 2005, at 16:38, Albert Chin wrote:

On Fri, Aug 26, 2005 at 04:26:57PM +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:

* Peter Ekberg wrote on Fri, Aug 26, 2005 at 04:06:05PM CEST:

What is the requirements on the autotools for a libtoolized
package from HEAD? I heard a rumor that cvs versions were
required, at least at some point, is that really the case
or was it just a rumor?

building itself.

At the moment they are required after a cvs checkout of Libtool HEAD for

When will HEAD be able to bootstrap with the latest released
autoconf/automake?

Just as soon as autoconf and automake put out new releases ;-)

But really, we would have to back out a lot of patches from libtool
HEAD (including another major reorganisation of the source tree)
to make that work.  And the whole point of dropping branch-2-0
is to bring a 2.0 release closer.  The 3 patches I attached to an
earlier mail are not too onerous.  With those applied to autoconf-2.59
and automake-1.9.6, you can bootstrap right now.

Cheers,
    Gary.
--

Research Scientist   ( '/   http://www.tkd.kicks-ass.net
GNU Hacker           / )=   http://www.gnu.org/software/{libtool,m4}
Technical Author   `(_~)_   http://sources.redhat.com/autobook

Gary V. Vaughan ())_. gary@ {lilith.warpmail.net,gnu.org},[EMAIL PROTECTED]

PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

_______________________________________________
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool