From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2012 23:05:46 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH] libtool version update 2.4.2 In-Reply-To: <50A02018.1000804@mind.be> References: <1352464732-22984-1-git-send-email-alexander@mezon.ru> <20121110105308.740a3bfa@skate> <50A02018.1000804@mind.be> Message-ID: <20121111230546.709735e3@skate> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net On Sun, 11 Nov 2012 23:00:56 +0100, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote: > On 11/10/12 10:53, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > > Alexander, > > > > On Fri, 9 Nov 2012 16:38:52 +0400, Alexander Khryukin wrote: > > > >> -LIBTOOL_VERSION = 2.2.10 > >> +LIBTOOL_VERSION = 2.4.2 > > > > How much testing did you give to this version bump? A libtool > > version bump is a very sensitive operation, as host-libtool is used > > to autoreconfigure many packages in Buildroot. Therefore, this > > patch needs a good amount of testing before being committed > > (ideally testing that all packages having_AUTORECONF = YES > > still build). > > Can't we rely on the autobuilders to do that? Sure, we'll certainly rely on the autobuilders for a complete testing. But I wanted to know if it had been tested again 2 packages or 20-40 packages, which makes quite a bit of difference :) > That said, I wouldn't do this for 2012.11 anymore... For sure, it should not be part of 2012.11, we already have enough issues to fix. Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux development, consulting, training and support. http://free-electrons.com