Re: [python-committers] autoconf 2.70

2016-09-11 Thread Xavier de Gaye 

On 07/22/2016 06:41 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 at 06:02 Xavier de Gaye mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
> It seems that the configure file on the default branch has been generated 
with
> autoconf 2.70. Autoconf 2.70 has not yet been released [1].  The 
differences
> between the generated configure files with 2.69 and 2.70 are a few lines 
[3]
> added by 2.70 with 'runstatedir' in them.  The last old discussion on the
> usage of different autoconf versions [2] does not really answer the 
following
> question:
>
> I am using 2.69, should a commit that changes configure.ac 
 respects the
> existing 'runstatedir' lines added by a previous commit or uses directly 
the
> configure file generated by 2.69 ?
>
>
> If autoconf 2.70 is not released yet then it's fine to regenerate configure 
w/ 2.69.
>
> -Brett


Changeset 816ae3abd928 regenerated the configure script with 'runstatedir'
again. AFAIK Autoconf 2.70 has still not yet been released. Please let us stick
with 2.69.

Xavier
___
python-committers mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Re: [python-committers] autoconf 2.70

2016-09-11 Thread Ned Deily 
On Sep 11, 2016, at 16:17, Xavier de Gaye  wrote:
> Changeset 816ae3abd928 regenerated the configure script with 'runstatedir'
> again. AFAIK Autoconf 2.70 has still not yet been released. Please let us 
> stick
> with 2.69.

As far as I can tell, the spurious "runstatedir" doesn't affect Python builds.  
But I'll make sure to rerun autoconf and remove it before tagging for b1.

--
  Ned Deily
  [email protected] -- []

___
python-committers mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Re: [python-committers] autoconf 2.70

2016-09-11 Thread Benjamin Peterson 
The correct way to solve this is probably to stop checking in the
generated configure and generate it with a "blessed" autoconf version in
the release tarballs.

On Sun, Sep 11, 2016, at 13:17, Xavier de Gaye wrote:
> On 07/22/2016 06:41 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
>  >
>  >
>  > On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 at 06:02 Xavier de Gaye  > wrote:
>  >
>  > It seems that the configure file on the default branch has been 
> generated with
>  > autoconf 2.70. Autoconf 2.70 has not yet been released [1].  The 
> differences
>  > between the generated configure files with 2.69 and 2.70 are a few 
> lines [3]
>  > added by 2.70 with 'runstatedir' in them.  The last old discussion on 
> the
>  > usage of different autoconf versions [2] does not really answer the 
> following
>  > question:
>  >
>  > I am using 2.69, should a commit that changes configure.ac 
>  respects the
>  > existing 'runstatedir' lines added by a previous commit or uses 
> directly the
>  > configure file generated by 2.69 ?
>  >
>  >
>  > If autoconf 2.70 is not released yet then it's fine to regenerate 
> configure w/ 2.69.
>  >
>  > -Brett
> 
> 
> Changeset 816ae3abd928 regenerated the configure script with
> 'runstatedir'
> again. AFAIK Autoconf 2.70 has still not yet been released. Please let us
> stick
> with 2.69.
> 
> Xavier
> ___
> python-committers mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
> Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
___
python-committers mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/