On Nov 28, 2008, at 4:05 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 11/28/2008 06:35 PM, Rainer Jung wrote:
Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group schrieb:
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Paul Querna
Gesendet: Freitag, 28. November 2008 17:55
An: dev@httpd.apache.org
Betreff: Re: Preferred versions of libtool and autoconf for T&R
Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote:
What are our preferred versions of autoconf and libtool for
T&R on the weekend?
As far as I remember autoconf 2.61 had some problems.
I'm not actually sure now days what specific version should
be used, I
haven't done RM in a while :-/
Just make sure you use a local copy, hand compiled version, not
That was my plan. Jim what versions did you use last time?
The generated files in the httpd distribution and also in the bundled
apr/apr-util tell us it was autoconf 2.61 and libtool 1.5.26.
There was a short discussion about autoconf versions and apr and
httpd
releasing before 2.2.10:
http://marc.info/?t=122168206000001&r=1&w=2
The technical reasons for nit chosing 2.62 are contained in the
discussion starting with your mail
http://marc.info/?l=apr-dev&m=121814441110258&w=2
Thanks for the pointers.
Any objections going with autoconf 2.63 and libtool 1.5.26?
If autoconf 2.63 is seen as too risky I would go back to autoconf
2.61.
I've not used 2.63... 2.61 at least has history behind it so I'd
say stick with that.
