--- Tom Tromey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>>> "KC" == Kelley Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > KC> 2005-08-19 Kelley Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > KC> * Makefile.am (ACLOCAL_AMFLAGS): Also include "..". > KC> * acinclude.m4: Delete. Extract CHECK_FOR_BROKEN_MINGW_LD to > ... > KC> * mingwld.m4: ... this new file. > KC> * aclocal.m4, Makefile.in, gcj/Makefile.in: Regenerate. > KC> * include/Makefile.in, testsuite/Makfile.in: Regenerate. > > You used automake 1.9.4 to build Makefile.in.
Yes, Andrew had used 1.9.4 in his patch (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2005-08/msg00618.html) from a few days before, so I did also. I actually had to download that version first. > AIUI, with the exception of libgfortran, the tree is currently > standardized on automake 1.9.3. I wouldn't mind an update, but it > ought to be done globally and install.texi ought to be updated. > Meanwhile, having folks using different versions causes cvs churn... Unfortunately, we have automake 1.9.3, 1.9.4 and 1.9.5 floating throughout the tree. I propose standardizing the entire tree on 1.9.6, as it is the current release; moreover the 1.9 branch has only had a few minor patches since 1.9.6 was released 6 weeks ago so 1.9.6 might be stable for a while. > > Probably we should have a script in contrib/ that downloads and > builds all the currently-required tool versions. This would be very cool.
