Re: Possible regressions with trunk autoconf (vs 2.71)

2022-11-18 Thread Frederic Berat
Hello, I may have found a weird one with EGREP_TRADITIONAL. It'll be hard to have a snippet though, but I'll try to explain. The apr program has shown a weird behavior during configure execution: configure:26378: checking whether int64_t and long use fmt %ld configure:26413: gcc -c -g -O2 -Werr

Re: Possible regressions with trunk autoconf (vs 2.71)

2022-11-18 Thread Sam James
> On 18 Nov 2022, at 07:11, Frederic Berat wrote: > > Thanks, I'll update the bug I opened for them. Could you share the links? Thanks. signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: Possible regressions with trunk autoconf (vs 2.71)

2022-11-18 Thread Nick Bowler
On 2022-11-18, Frederic Berat wrote: > The apr program has shown a weird behavior during configure execution: [...] > I found that the problem was actually that "$EGREP_TRADITIONAL" was > undefined during the execution of AC_TYPE_UID_T. > While the corresponding symbol was constructed within a cas

Re: Possible regressions with trunk autoconf (vs 2.71)

2022-11-18 Thread Bob Friesenhahn
On Thu, 17 Nov 2022, Paul Eggert wrote: Thanks for reporting that. I installed the attached patch to work around the bug in libpng. Of course this is just a hack, but there's some benefit to it and no harm that I can see. Could you please report the issue to the libpng maintainers? The attach

Re: Possible regressions with trunk autoconf (vs 2.71)

2022-11-18 Thread Frederic Berat
There are about 70 softwares (in Fedora ecosystem at least) which are affected by this comma. It will be hard for one person to track the upstream for each of them individually. I'll probably create issues at the package level on our side, so that their respective maintainers track the issue with

Re: Possible regressions with trunk autoconf (vs 2.71)

2022-11-18 Thread Frederic Berat
For now I track the failures through a "meta-bug" in Fedora [1], and create individual bugs for each package's maintainer individually as the analysis progresses [2][3][4][5], and if the issue is assumed to be on their side. Considering the amount of work, I leave the upstream discussion to the res