On 8/25/2018 1:18 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 08/24/2018 05:59 PM, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
>>> It is not autoconf's problem when someone writes a configure.ac that
>>> wrongly
>>> claims to use too-new of a version of automake. But if you don't
>>> think the
>>> package is actually relying on a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 27/08/18 15:42, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Aug 2018, Marko Lindqvist wrote:
>
>> Indeed. When considering addition of a new macro call to
>> configure.ac it often requires a lot of digging (usually from
>> NEWS) to find out if using that
On Sat, 25 Aug 2018, Marko Lindqvist wrote:
Indeed. When considering addition of a new macro call to configure.ac
it often requires a lot of digging (usually from NEWS) to find out if
using that macro is safe with current minimum autoconf version
requirement. It would be really good if the
On 08/24/2018 05:59 PM, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
It is not autoconf's problem when someone writes a configure.ac that wrongly
claims to use too-new of a version of automake. But if you don't think the
package is actually relying on a feature that only that newer automake
provided, you are welcome
