On 13 Jan 2024 15:58, Karl Berry wrote:
> Another alternative: when this came up 30-odd years ago, rms changed the
> GNU maintainers doc to suggest x.y.90, .91, etc. for pretests. Doing
> that would at least have the benefit of following a recommendation, and
> as a side effect, would also fix jami
On 13 Jan 2024 22:29, Bogdan wrote:
> Mike Frysinger , 2024-01-13 07:19:
> > On 15 Mar 2023 17:31, Bogdan wrote:
> >>Another patch from my side. This one makes it possible for users to
> >> pass additional options to libtool in 'compile' mode. Fixes #54020.
> >>
> >>Added documentation and
there is nothing requiring or restricting the current version behavior
other than "it's always been this way".
True.
but that doesn't mean it's better.
No way to know what release or test scripts might be relying on the
current convention. Changing for the sake of change doesn't se
Mike Frysinger , 2024-01-13 07:19:
On 15 Mar 2023 17:31, Bogdan wrote:
Another patch from my side. This one makes it possible for users to
pass additional options to libtool in 'compile' mode. Fixes #54020.
Added documentation and a test case including the '-no-suppress'
option. All tests
Mike Frysinger , 2024-01-13 07:26:
On 21 Mar 2023 23:05, Bogdan wrote:
Third, and most important (I think) is that we need to note that
"prog/x.py" is GENERATED, but is NOT marked so. Adding
BUILT_SOURCES = prog/x.py
i don't think this is a correct use of BUILT_SOURCES.
https://www
