Re: [patch 1/28] top-level: Use automake-1.11.6

2015-05-06 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 10:50:57AM +0200, Michael Haubenwallner wrote: > > Am 2015-05-05 um 18:03 schrieb Michael Haubenwallner: > > Now that gcc-5 is out, what about an automake-1.11.6 update for gcc-6? > > Patch for top-level files. > 2015-05-06 Michael Haubenwallner > > Use automake-

Re: [patch 1/28] top-level: Use automake-1.11.6

2015-05-06 Thread Joseph Myers
On Wed, 6 May 2015, Michael Haubenwallner wrote: > Am 2015-05-05 um 18:03 schrieb Michael Haubenwallner: > > Now that gcc-5 is out, what about an automake-1.11.6 update for gcc-6? > > Patch for top-level files. I don't think this top-level patch is a good idea. These are *not* generated files,

RE: [patch 1/28] top-level: Use automake-1.11.6

2015-05-07 Thread Bernd Edlinger
Hi, On Wed, 6 May 2015 15:55:57, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > > On Wed, 6 May 2015, Michael Haubenwallner wrote: > >> Am 2015-05-05 um 18:03 schrieb Michael Haubenwallner: >>> Now that gcc-5 is out, what about an automake-1.11.6 update for gcc-6? >> >> Patch for top-level files. > > I don't think this

RE: [patch 1/28] top-level: Use automake-1.11.6

2015-05-07 Thread Joseph Myers
On Thu, 7 May 2015, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > But that is not the case for other tool scripts.  I think these should > be in-sync with the automake version that creates the configure scripts > that make use of them. At least some of these scripts are also usable other than from automake-generate

RE: [patch 1/28] top-level: Use automake-1.11.6

2015-05-08 Thread Bernd Edlinger
Hi, On Thu, 7 May 2015 15:25:14, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > > On Thu, 7 May 2015, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > >> But that is not the case for other tool scripts. I think these should >> be in-sync with the automake version that creates the configure scripts >> that make use of them. > > At least some o

RE: [patch 1/28] top-level: Use automake-1.11.6

2015-05-08 Thread Joseph Myers
On Fri, 8 May 2015, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > One example where there is an incompatibility is "missing": > > Formerly it had code that emulated the missing "flex" by > creating a dummy lex.yy.c from the hopefully installed > pre-compiled flex output file.  But the version from the > trunk does not

RE: [patch 1/28] top-level: Use automake-1.11.6

2015-05-08 Thread Bernd Edlinger
Hi, On Fri, 8 May 2015 16:41:02, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > > On Fri, 8 May 2015, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > >> One example where there is an incompatibility is "missing": >> >> Formerly it had code that emulated the missing "flex" by >> creating a dummy lex.yy.c from the hopefully installed >> pre-com

RE: [patch 1/28] top-level: Use automake-1.11.6

2015-05-08 Thread Joseph Myers
On Fri, 8 May 2015, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > But it made the in-tree gmp configure script fail.  That would not > have happened if we did not pass our version of missing to a sub- > module like gmp, that already has a working missing script that behaves > differently. However, that's still not an

RE: [patch 1/28] top-level: Use automake-1.11.6

2015-05-08 Thread Bernd Edlinger
Hi, On Fri, 8 May 2015 20:20:55, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > > On Fri, 8 May 2015, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > >> But it made the in-tree gmp configure script fail. That would not >> have happened if we did not pass our version of missing to a sub- >> module like gmp, that already has a working missing

RE: [patch 1/28] top-level: Use automake-1.11.6

2015-05-11 Thread Joseph Myers
On Sat, 9 May 2015, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > But maybe you would like it better if we update, for instance, to: > automake-1.14  _and_  autoconf-2.69 ? Updating to current automake and autoconf release versions (but still using git versions of the toplevel scripts, not those from particular rele

Re: [patch 1/28] top-level: Use automake-1.11.6

2015-05-12 Thread Michael Haubenwallner
On 05/11/2015 07:55 PM, Joseph Myers wrote: > On Sat, 9 May 2015, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > >> But maybe you would like it better if we update, for instance, to: >> automake-1.14 _and_ autoconf-2.69 ? > > Updating to current automake and autoconf release versions (but still > using git versions

Re: [patch 1/28] top-level: Use automake-1.11.6

2015-05-12 Thread Joseph Myers
On Tue, 12 May 2015, Michael Haubenwallner wrote: > On 05/11/2015 07:55 PM, Joseph Myers wrote: > > On Sat, 9 May 2015, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > > > >> But maybe you would like it better if we update, for instance, to: > >> automake-1.14 _and_ autoconf-2.69 ? > > > > Updating to current automak

Re: [patch 1/28] top-level: Use automake-1.11.6

2015-05-12 Thread Michael Haubenwallner
On 05/12/2015 10:45 AM, Michael Haubenwallner wrote: > On 05/11/2015 07:55 PM, Joseph Myers wrote: >> On Sat, 9 May 2015, Bernd Edlinger wrote: >> >>> But maybe you would like it better if we update, for instance, to: >>> automake-1.14 _and_ autoconf-2.69 ? >> >> Updating to current automake and

Re: [patch 1/28] top-level: Use automake-1.11.6

2015-05-12 Thread Joseph Myers
On Tue, 12 May 2015, Michael Haubenwallner wrote: > It turns out that besides the top-level ones there are more > copied-from-automake > files in various library dirs - where some of them seem quite outdated > actually: > > libffi/mdate-sh > libjava/classpath/INSTALL > libjava/libltdl/con