Hi Chuck, Peter, Automakers, On 22 Sep 2010, at 05:02, Charles Wilson wrote: > Peter Rosin wrote: >> Just a friendly ping, but only just now I pushed a change to the >> 'compile' script in automake and would like the new version in >> the release if it's not too much to ask for. Thanks! > > Errr...is that kosher? I thought libtool was only supposed to ship the > scripts provided by released versions of automake, not git head > copies... Otherwise, if I autoreconf the libtool source archive, then I > will downgrade 'compile' et al unless I take special steps.
I don't recall having done so in a while but, according to bootstrap: # It is okay for the bootstrap process to require unreleased autoconf # or automake, as long as any released libtool will work with at least # the newest stable versions of each. Generally, newer versions offer # better features, and configure.ac documents oldest version of each # required for bootstrap (AC_PREREQ, and AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE). And in the release template in HACKING: You will then need to have recent (possibly as yet unreleased) versions of Automake and Autoconf installed to bootstrap the checked out sources yourself. So, I will install git automake at the front of my PATH, and if the release process works, then I'll go ahead and use it for the release. Automake gurus: Is there a better way to save rebootstrappers from accidental downgrade than specifying AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE([1.11a]) in libtool's configure.ac? Pity Automake doesn't use gnulibs `git-version-gen' so that I could specify the particular revision with the compile script patch that we want at libtool bootstrap time. Cheers, -- Gary V. Vaughan (g...@gnu.org)
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
