Hallo Ralf,
On 21 Apr 2008, at 01:23, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
* Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 02:39:37AM CEST:
* libltdl/lt__private.h (lt__handle, lt__advise): Typedefs
removed in favour of...
* libltdl/ltdl.h (lt_dlhandle),
libltdl/libltdl/lt_dlloader.h (lt_dladvise): ...changi
* libtoolize.at (func_check_macros): Always advise use of
AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIR when not able to copy libtool macros into
the project tree.
* tests/libtoolize.at: Update expected test output.
* NEWS: Updated.
---
Okay to apply?
ChangeLog |7 +++
NEWS|2 ++
lib
As a side effect, this also means that when `aclocal' copies the
libtool macros into `aclocal.m4' libtoolize complains only about
the macro files that are missing or not up-to-date.
* libtoolize.m4sh (func_echo_once): New function that prints
the contents of a named variable only on the first call.
* Bob Friesenhahn wrote on Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 05:14:00PM CEST:
> On Mon, 21 Apr 2008, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
>>
>> If they were lower in between, and since increased, there must have been
>> at least one regression along the way. Can you use git bisect to
>> identify one?
>
> Remember that you f
Hi Peter,
On 21 Apr 2008, at 16:20, Peter O'Gorman wrote:
Peter O'Gorman wrote:
I will fix, and even apply the (non-failing) test tomorrow.
Making the test fail is better.
Ok?
Looks good to me. Please apply.
Peter
--
Peter O'Gorman
http://pogma.com
From d9a4d8f71ae415bb716dc8267a506a10
Peter O'Gorman wrote:
> I will fix, and even apply the (non-failing) test tomorrow.
Making the test fail is better.
Ok?
Peter
--
Peter O'Gorman
http://pogma.com
>From d9a4d8f71ae415bb716dc8267a506a102bacf0b2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Peter O'Gorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 20
Hi Bob,
* Bob Friesenhahn wrote on Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 07:25:10PM CEST:
>
> Since the full patch appears on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list, perhaps
> it is not necessary to manually duplicate already committed patches on
> this list?
It's an idea. However, those commit messages
- don't allow to a
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008, Peter O'Gorman wrote:
Hi,
I just pushed this.
Since the full patch appears on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list,
perhaps it is not necessary to manually duplicate already committed
patches on this list?
What are the official rules regarding when the patch must be posted
to t
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
Does this work with C and C++ compilers? Does it change the ABI or API?
If yes, no, then I like it. Otherwise, as nice as it is, it would be a
bit inappropriate for a minor release number, no?
I use this approach in GraphicsMagick C code without an
Hi,
I just pushed this.
Peter
--
Peter O'Gorman
http://pogma.com
>From 39903a5836fc563e83fe6aa614d75a2a3ebe04fe Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Peter O'Gorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2008 10:21:27 -0500
Subject: [PATCH] Use AC_CHECK_TOOL for lipo too.
* libltdl/m4/libtool.m4 (_LT_RE
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
If they were lower in between, and since increased, there must have been
at least one regression along the way. Can you use git bisect to
identify one?
Remember that you fixed an expr-related bug which was impacting
FreeBSD and causing an error mes
On Mon, 2008-04-21 at 09:29 +0200, Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
> On Sat, 2008-04-19 at 18:40 +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > Hello Michael,
> >
> > * Michael Haubenwallner wrote on Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 04:59:43PM CEST:
> > >
> > > when doing the libtool testsuite in some NFS mounted directory
On Sat, 2008-04-19 at 18:40 +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Hello Michael,
>
> * Michael Haubenwallner wrote on Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 04:59:43PM CEST:
> >
> > when doing the libtool testsuite in some NFS mounted directory on AIX,
> > the output is full of lines looking like:
> > rm: canno
13 matches
Mail list logo
