On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 03:28:31PM +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: | On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 11:24:42PM +1000, Luke Mewburn wrote: | > On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 03:08:00PM +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: | > | I'm wondering whether we shouldn't just include the macros and ignore | > | 2.60+ for now. | > | > Include which macros, where? | | Copy AC_TYPE_* to acsite.m4 to include them with our version. I'm not convinced this particular effort is worth doing. We would have to be very careful in the porting effort to ensure that the AC_TYPE_* macros we obtain from autoconf 2.60 don't depend upon other changes made since 2.52. Then we'd also have the future maintenance issues. What particular portability problems are you trying to fix with these proposals? If there's a valid enough reason to upgrade, I'm all for working (with you) to update tools/compat to a more recent autoconf and more up-to-date tests. If it's mostly an aesthetic goal, then it can wait until after 5.0. cheers, Luke.
Description: PGP signature