Re: autoconf 2.69?

2013-03-27 Thread Chet Ramey
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 3/27/13 6:29 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > not that i'm against upstream people from updating their autotool versions. Sure, but honestly it's not the highest thing on my list. - -- ``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer

Re: autoconf 2.69?

2013-03-27 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Wednesday 27 March 2013 14:02:57 Chet Ramey wrote: > On 3/27/13 1:07 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On Wednesday 27 March 2013 11:44:32 Roman Rakus wrote: > >> Support for the ARM 64 bit CPU architecture (aarch64) was introduced in > >> autoconf 2.69. bash

Re: autoconf 2.69?

2013-03-27 Thread Chet Ramey
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 3/27/13 1:07 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Wednesday 27 March 2013 11:44:32 Roman Rakus wrote: >> Support for the ARM 64 bit CPU architecture (aarch64) was introduced in >> autoconf 2.69. bash uses an earlier version of >>

Re: autoconf 2.69?

2013-03-27 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Wednesday 27 March 2013 11:44:32 Roman Rakus wrote: > Support for the ARM 64 bit CPU architecture (aarch64) was introduced in > autoconf 2.69. bash uses an earlier version of > autoconf, preventing its being built. are you talking about config.{sub,guess}, or something els

autoconf 2.69?

2013-03-27 Thread Roman Rakus
Support for the ARM 64 bit CPU architecture (aarch64) was introduced in autoconf 2.69. bash uses an earlier version of autoconf, preventing its being built. Is there any plan to upgrade to version 2.69. Looking at devel branch it is using 2.68. RR