Re: libtool, how should the version be parsed?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to René Berber on 5/15/2009 10:16 PM: $ libtoolize --version | sed 's/^[^0-9]*\([0-9].[0-9.]*\).*/\1/' 1.3081 2003 2009 ... Weird, its looking for the first number, must be as confused as I am, So that should be reported as a bug

libtool, how should the version be parsed?

Hi, I was trying to build some package and it complained that libtool 1.4 was needed... looking at the version: $ libtool --version libtool (GNU libtool 1.3081 2009-02-17) 2.2.7a Is it 1.3081 or 2.2.7a? I see at gnu.org that the latest stable is 2.2.6a, so I suppose the one in Cygwin (1.7) is

Re: libtool, how should the version be parsed?

René Berber wrote: Hi, I was trying to build some package and it complained that libtool 1.4 was needed... looking at the version: $ libtool --version libtool (GNU libtool 1.3081 2009-02-17) 2.2.7a Is it 1.3081 or 2.2.7a? It is 2.2.7a. You can see that from the announcement here:

Re: libtool, how should the version be parsed?

Charles Wilson wrote: [snip] So, next time, kindly refrain from accusing my package of insanity. But while we're on the subject...libtool-1.4 dates from 27-Nov-2003, more than 5.5 years ago... Thanks for all the info. I learned something new. As for the old version, that's just a