Jim Meyering writes:
> On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 7:52 PM Paul Eggert wrote:
>> On 3/17/23 19:08, Jim Meyering wrote:
>> > Can someone see if there's some small/safe set of changes that are
>> > essential?
>> > If none (or few/easy), I might have time to make a snapshot soon.
>>
>> As far as I kn
On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 7:52 PM Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 3/17/23 19:08, Jim Meyering wrote:
> > Can someone see if there's some small/safe set of changes that are
> > essential?
> > If none (or few/easy), I might have time to make a snapshot soon.
>
> As far as I know, none of the pending patches
On 3/17/23 19:08, Jim Meyering wrote:
Can someone see if there's some small/safe set of changes that are essential?
If none (or few/easy), I might have time to make a snapshot soon.
As far as I know, none of the pending patches are essential and we can
release what we have.
On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 6:00 PM Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 3/17/23 16:47, Sam James wrote:
> > Clang 16 was released today. Unfortunately, all released versions of
> > autoconf still generate configure scripts which are incompatible with it.
>
> Presumably "./configure CC='clang -std=gnu17" is a work
On 3/17/23 16:47, Sam James wrote:
Clang 16 was released today. Unfortunately, all released versions of
autoconf still generate configure scripts which are incompatible with it.
Presumably "./configure CC='clang -std=gnu17" is a workaround, though
admittedly this is awkward.
Is anyone aware
Sam James writes:
> [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]]
>
>
>> On 3 Feb 2023, at 07:43, Frederic Berat wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm also in favor of an RC release, I can then rebuild Fedora packages using
>> the tarball from the tester list and do some kind of A/B testing.
>>
> Paul, would you be w
> On 3 Feb 2023, at 07:43, Frederic Berat wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm also in favor of an RC release, I can then rebuild Fedora packages using
> the tarball from the tester list and do some kind of A/B testing.
>
Paul, would you be willing to try this? I don't think much work should be
needed (f
On Mon, Feb 6, 2023, at 12:34 PM, Marko Lindqvist wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Feb 2023 at 19:23, Zack Weinberg wrote:
>> __
>> On the subject of Debian, we could probably get an RC into experimental and
>> ask for archive rebuilds and say that we were hoping to get 2.72 approved
>> for a bookworm stable
On Mon, 6 Feb 2023 at 19:23, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> On the subject of Debian, we could probably get an RC into experimental
> and ask for archive rebuilds and say that we were hoping to get 2.72
> approved for a bookworm stable update.
>
> zw
>
Even with the stage of the Debian freeze (at the ti
On the subject of Debian, we could probably get an RC into experimental and ask
for archive rebuilds and say that we were hoping to get 2.72 approved for a
bookworm stable update.
zw
On Fri, Feb 3, 2023, at 2:43 AM, Frederic Berat wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm also in favor of an RC release, I can then
Hi,
I'm also in favor of an RC release, I can then rebuild Fedora packages
using the tarball from the tester list and do some kind of A/B testing.
Fred.
On Fri, Feb 3, 2023 at 6:50 AM Sam James wrote:
>
>
> > On 2 Feb 2023, at 23:17, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> >
> > Due to a series of crises with
> On 2 Feb 2023, at 23:17, Zack Weinberg wrote:
>
> Due to a series of crises with my day job, the earliest I can promise to do
> _anything_ Autoconf related is early March. If you have time to make a
> release before then, please do not wait for me.
>
Sorry to hear Zack, hope you're doing
Due to a series of crises with my day job, the earliest I can promise to do
_anything_ Autoconf related is early March. If you have time to make a release
before then, please do not wait for me.
zw
On 2/1/23 22:43, Sam James wrote:
Unfortunately, I think we've missed the Debian freeze I think, but it is what
it is there
(was hoping to get it in there so we could benefit from the large number of
people who make dist tarballs on Debian).
Oh well. As you say, it is what it is.
Since there
14 matches
Mail list logo
