On Sun, 11 Jun 2017 17:20:49 +0200 Kristian Fiskerstrand <k...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 06/11/2017 05:17 PM, Mart Raudsepp wrote: > >> We can always patch the eclass at that point if that is still a big > >> concern, but I fundamentally agree with William on this, starting > >> point > >> should be fixing it upstream, so can start with a tracking bug on > >> affected packages. > > That's a complete useless waste of time, to track some ancient > > packages that don't get any upstream update anyway. The active ones > > have updated it long ago. And it'd be a joke to propose last riting > > for the reason of a file being named configure.in instead of > > configure.ac. > > > > > > That determination can be made on a package-by-package basis and fixed > in ebuild if needed. > Funny thing is that packages still using autoconf 2.1* don't get any warning and packages setting WANT_AUTOCONF to some older version will never break...
