Re: 1.1.2 is broken if you have closefrom()
On June 15, 2006 12:42:34 PM +0200 Nicolas Baradakis <nbk@sitadelle.com> wrote:
Frank Cusack wrote:
On June 9, 2006 1:56:16 PM +0200 Nicolas Baradakis <nbk@sitadelle.com> wrote:
I also note the autotools versions have to be compatible: libtool 1.4 comes with autoconf 2.13, and libtool 1.5 comes with autoconf 2.50. Upgrade one but not the other may lead to unpredictable results.
Well, even 1.1 as-is actually requires autoconf-2.50. I was going to put add that to configure.in as part of the patch.
I don't understand: the current branch 1.1 with libtool 1.4 has always used autoconf 2.13.
My mistake; autoconf-2.13 merely generates a warning about AC_TRY_RUN with branch 1.1. It was only after I updated libtool that it required 2.50. BTW, creating "test" branches to try stuff out, then merging them back, is trivial with p4. There wouldn't be any question about submitting. (And this is where p4 beats svn also, so I've read.) -frank
Frank Cusack <fcusack@fcusack.com> wrote:
BTW, creating "test" branches to try stuff out, then merging them back, is trivial with p4. There wouldn't be any question about submitting. (And this is where p4 beats svn also, so I've read.)
Or Mercurial. I'll take a look at setting that up. Alan DeKok.
On June 15, 2006 8:23:46 PM -0400 Alan DeKok <aland@nitros9.org> wrote:
Frank Cusack <fcusack@fcusack.com> wrote:
BTW, creating "test" branches to try stuff out, then merging them back, is trivial with p4. There wouldn't be any question about submitting. (And this is where p4 beats svn also, so I've read.)
Or Mercurial. I'll take a look at setting that up.
Looks like bitkeeper, along with cumbersome version references, and branching doesn't seem as strong as p4. I never could get my head around the bk model. But it does have 3 way merging (which even bk doesn't have AFAIK), which is a REALLY good feature. -frank
participants (2)
-
Alan DeKok -
Frank Cusack