On Fri, 2004-01-16 at 16:49, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > On Fri, 16 Jan 2004, Scott James Remnant wrote: > > > > I'm going to see whether we can hack around this, but to be honest, I > > don't see any problem with requiring 1.8 for our bootstrap now -- it > > significantly reduces the size of our tar.gz > > I don't see any problem with this requirement either. Perhaps some > Linux distribution maintainers would disagree. Linux distributions > should be encouraged to use and provide the latest auto* tools. > Theoretically they shouldn't need to worry about our CVS bootstrap, as they'd be packaging our released tarballs anyway.
Scott -- Have you ever, ever felt like this? Had strange things happen? Are you going round the twist?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Libtool mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
