On Thu, 2023-11-30 at 16:51 -0500, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> We are pleased to announce beta release 2.72d of Autoconf. (Versions
> 2.72a, 2.72b, and 2.72c were development snapshots, not official alpha
> or beta releases.)
>
> 2.72 will be a minor bug-fix release. The most significant changes
> ar
On Fri, 2023-03-31 at 19:53 -0700, Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 2023-03-28 13:57, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > From a regression/failure point of view, the worrying issue is the
> > gpgme/mpg123 issue on x32 which also appears for musl 32 and 64 bit x86
> > ta
On Wed, 2023-03-29 at 01:53 +0200, Bruno Haible wrote:
> Richard Purdie wrote:
> > > We run autoreconf against most things.
> > > ...
> > > gettext 0.21.1:
> > > ...
> >
> > The latter two look like they're as I'm missing the gnulib f
On Tue, 2023-03-28 at 09:03 -0700, Jim Meyering wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 7:23 AM Richard Purdie
> wrote:
> > I was able to work around the EGREP_TRADITIONAL issue by reordering
> > macros. The issue is conditional code blocks which mean
> > EGREP_TRADITIONAL was n
I was able to work around the EGREP_TRADITIONAL issue by reordering
macros. The issue is conditional code blocks which mean
EGREP_TRADITIONAL was not set in some configure option combinations
leading to obtuse failures.
Our testing so far shows the following three sets of issues.
Macro ordering
On Tue, 2023-03-28 at 09:18 +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Tue, 2023-03-28 at 08:44 +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > On Mon, 2023-03-27 at 08:38 -0700, Jim Meyering wrote:
> > > We're overdue for a new release, so here's a snapshot in preparation
> > >
On Tue, 2023-03-28 at 08:44 +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Mon, 2023-03-27 at 08:38 -0700, Jim Meyering wrote:
> > We're overdue for a new release, so here's a snapshot in preparation
> > for that, which I want to call 2.73 (skipping 2.72). There has never
> >
On Mon, 2023-03-27 at 08:38 -0700, Jim Meyering wrote:
> We're overdue for a new release, so here's a snapshot in preparation
> for that, which I want to call 2.73 (skipping 2.72). There has never
> been an autoconf-2.72 release, yet `git describe` now prints 2.72c and
> has been printing strings
On Fri, 2022-11-11 at 08:38 +, Sam James wrote:
> In Gentoo, we've been planning out what we should do for time64 on glibc [0]
> and concluded that we need some support in glibc for a newer option. I'll
> outline
> why below.
>
> Proposal: glibc gains two new build-time configure options:
> *
On Tue, 2022-06-14 at 13:11 -0400, Nick Bowler wrote:
> The resulting config.h is correct but pa.sh took almost 1 minute to run
> the configure script, about ten times longer than dash takes to run the
> same script. More than half of that time appears to be spent just
> loading the program into p
On Tue, 2021-03-23 at 20:16 -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Mar 2021, Dan Mahoney (Gushi) wrote:
>
> > Is there a "standard" way to do this? Google kind of fails for this.
>
> I see that Gavin Smith already answered the question you asked, but
> GraphicsMagick took a different tact.
On Wed, 2021-01-27 at 18:26 +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jan 2021, Richard Purdie wrote:
>
> > Thanks, I hadn't realised. The only two recipes we never autoreconf are
> > binutils and gcc, instead we do some painful things to handle libtool
> > issues so
On Wed, 2021-01-27 at 00:49 +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Jan 2021, Richard Purdie wrote:
>
> > I've also not seen mention of it but the fact that GCC and the
> > toolchain use an ancient version of autoconf has always been rather sad
> > to me.
>
&g
Firstly, thanks for the 2.70 release! Yocto Project hasn't switched yet
as whilst we tested it and reported issues, there was a last minute
change which broke things for us. We'll get that sorted and upgrade.
I am one of the lead developers of the Yocto Project and at its heart
is OpenEmbedded whi
14 matches
Mail list logo
