* Michael Jennings ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030319 18:15]:
> On Wednesday, 19 March 2003, at 17:52:00 (+0100),
> Kim Woelders wrote:
>
> Is there a problem with the 0.16.5 tarball? If so, I'd like to get
> that corrected. If it's related to newer auto* tools, though, I won't
> bother.
>
> > The patch also includes BAM<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>'s fix to configure.in to
> > get auto* going.
>
> Just for the record, any patch which breaks compatibility with
> autoconf 2.13, automake 1.4, etc. will not be applied to CVS. So if I
> have to strip out that portion, I will.
I know this has come up before, but I just checked my Debian unstable
packages and it's not too bad for me. I've got automake 1.4, but
autoconf is at 2.57. 'dpkg --status autoconf' does tell me this:
This version of autoconf contains many changes from the previous
release, version 2.13. If you need support for Autoconf 2.13, you
must install the autoconf2.13 package as well.
Not sure what people with other distros can do though...
Hall
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Does your code think in ink?
You could win a Tablet PC. Get a free Tablet PC hat just for playing.
What are you waiting for?
http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?micr5043en
_______________________________________________
enlightenment-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
