Hi,
On 2024-01-12 19:38, Giovanni Biscuolo wrote:
It's not a big deal if we just remove the older versions.
but if they are needed for bootstrapping they should be kept around, no?
No, because they are not needed for the bootstrapping itself. We build
stuff from scratch for it, I needed them to rebuild the configure
scripts on GCC, which I don't need to rebuild anymore (GCC's codebase
includes the configure scripts prebuilt). That's where I realized.
The problem I wanted to make us notice is we were keeping the 2.64
version and we didn't really provide any compatible automake, so the
autoconf@2.64 was almost useless.
I'm not very familiar with Autoconf and Automake (nor with
bootstrapping): is there a "compatibility table" around? I quickly had
a look to the respective manuals but I was not able to find one.
I don't know either. I tried to use the 2.64 one and that told me the
Automake wasn't compatible.
If no package uses those, it's ok to remove. I can always time-machine
around the problem.
OK old packages can always (almost) be time-machined back but if they
are needed for bootstrapping (for sexample if your work on GCC
bootstrapping is succesful) they should be in Guix proper, no?
is this a bug? :-)
The problem in my opinion is including a 2.64 autoconf that we can't run
actually use for the lack of a compatible automake. Not providing it is
a better option. I don't need it for bootstrapping recipes, and if I
need it in the future I'll remake the package.
If Autoconf 2.64 is not needed by any package my proposal is to remove
it from Guix and let the people interested on it to `time-machine`, as
that's going to probably have the correct automake with it.
Thanks for your work! Gio'
Thank you!
