Thank you for this summary!
On Oct 13, 2017 10:51, "Jim Jagielski" wrote:
> Let's recall what is really happening...
>
> In maintainer mode, the build system sets -Werror and -Wstrict-prototypes.
> This means that functions which lack strict prototypes will "fail".
>
> Now
Let's recall what is really happening...
In maintainer mode, the build system sets -Werror and -Wstrict-prototypes.
This means that functions which lack strict prototypes will "fail".
Now note that AC_CHECK_LIB does not worry about generating
function calls w/ prototypes, so, for example, when
Am 13.10.2017 um 17:05 schrieb William A Rowe Jr:
On Oct 13, 2017 08:41, "Stefan Eissing" > wrote:
> Am 13.10.2017 um 15:19 schrieb William A Rowe Jr
>:
>
>
On Oct 13, 2017 08:41, "Stefan Eissing"
wrote:
> Am 13.10.2017 um 15:19 schrieb William A Rowe Jr :
>
> Is anyone seeing an issue of concern about stability on 2.4.x branch?
Not any more than in previous releases, I think.
> Has anyone else
> Am 13.10.2017 um 15:19 schrieb William A Rowe Jr :
>
> Is anyone seeing an issue of concern about stability on 2.4.x branch?
Not any more than in previous releases, I think.
> Has anyone else looked at Jim's proposed fixes for xcode 9 building
> under maintainer mode? A
Why lump 2.5.0 into all this?
There is no rational reason to force connect 2.4.29 and 2.5.0
Tag 2.4.29 and leave 2.5.0 alone until people discuss it. Until then
I will veto any foolishness about 2.5.0-whatever.
> On Oct 13, 2017, at 9:19 AM, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
>
>
Is anyone seeing an issue of concern about stability on 2.4.x branch?
Has anyone else looked at Jim's proposed fixes for xcode 9 building
under maintainer mode? A couple-line quick fix to configure.in, that
anyone on OS/X should be able to validate in minutes. The same fix
is already present on