From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8184 invoked by alias); 5 Dec 2002 18:15:53 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 8162 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 18:15:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO duracef.shout.net) (204.253.184.12) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 18:15:51 -0000 Received: (from mec@localhost) by duracef.shout.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) id gB5IFeD10835; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 12:15:40 -0600 Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 10:15:00 -0000 From: Michael Elizabeth Chastain Message-Id: <200212051815.gB5IFeD10835@duracef.shout.net> To: drow@mvista.com, klee@apple.com Subject: Re: [RFC] Update to current automake/autoconf/libtool versions. Cc: ac131313@redhat.com, binutils@sources.redhat.com, dj@delorie.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl X-SW-Source: 2002-12/txt/msg00159.txt.bz2 Klee Dienes wrote: > 1) Specify the versions of autoconf/automake/libtool/gettext by > reference to official tarballs from ftp.gnu.org. In general, define > the version used to be "the most recent officially released version of > each tool". I'm not a heavy autotools guy, but I do try to maintain a standardized build + test enviroment for gdb testing. I agree with the idea of referring to official tarballs from ftp.gnu.org. I strongly think that the pointer should say "autoconf 2.56", for example, rather than "the most recent officialy released version of autoconf". If the pointer said "most recent officially released version of autoconf", and I followed those instructions, then I would unwittingly be using a different version of autoconf (2.57) then the version you are standardizing on (2.56). I would prefer an absolute version number, and we kick it forward when we are happy with the new release + when the project is not frozen in that regard. I'm comfortable with the ftp://sources.redhat.com/pub/binutils mirror if we really do enforce that the versions in there are the versions that we use. But I'm more comfortable if src/README-maintainer-mode points directly to ftp.gnu.org. It seems easier to manage a version list in README-maintainer-mode rather than ftp://sources.redhat.com/pub/binutils. Also as a gdb maintainer I can notice changes in README-maintainer-mode easier than I can notice changes in ftp://sources.redhat.com/pub/binutils. (BTW the top level src/README-maintainer-mode file still refers to ftp://sourceware.cygnus.com). Michael C