=?utf-8?Q?Dagfinn_Ilmari_Manns=C3=A5ker?= <ilm...@ilmari.org> writes:
> Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
>> So maybe we should revive that idea, though I'd definitely target
>> autoconf 2.72 not 2.71.
> Just a data point: autoconf 2.72 came out under a year ago, so the most
> recent Debian Stable (12) and Ubuntu LTS (24.04) only have 2.71.
I don't think we care, except to the extent that usage of 2.72 in
widely-used distros would increase confidence in it (which is far
from a trivial consideration). For many years, we've had a policy
that committers should use autoconf-built-from-GNU-sources rather
than distro packages. The distros tend to stick in local changes
that affect the output, but we need uniform output so that there's
not random churn in the committed version of the configure script.
Still, we're in wait-and-see mode about C23, so maybe wait-and-see
for awhile longer about autoconf 2.72 as well.
> They both have m4 1.4.19, though.
That's good news anyway. Per the older thread, building m4 from
source is no fun at all.
regards, tom lane
