[Cluster-devel] [RFC] Proposal to align autotool versions

[Cluster-devel] [RFC] Proposal to align autotool versions

[Fabio M. Di Nitto]

Hi guys,

I just completed testing of autotools in F13/rawhide and they seem to
fulfill perfectly what we need so far.

Fedora13 has:

libtool 2.2.6 (doesn?t carry the bug for which we were forcing 2.2.7)
autoconf 2.64 (higher than what we require now)
automake 1.11/m4/pkg-config in more than recent enough versions.

corosync/openais will eventually get libtool support.
cluster-stable3 autotool implementation is eventually on the schedule.
cluster/master trees are already ported.

My suggestion is simply to use those versions across the projects so
that developers will not require any longer to manually build autotools
and can start easily testing again master trees.

Please ACK/NACK.

Fabio

[Cluster-devel] [RFC] Proposal to align autotool versions

[Steven Whitehouse]

Hi,

On Tue, 2009-11-24 at 14:33 +0100, Fabio M. Di Nitto wrote:
> Hi guys,
> 
> I just completed testing of autotools in F13/rawhide and they seem to
> fulfill perfectly what we need so far.
> 
> Fedora13 has:
> 
> libtool 2.2.6 (doesn?t carry the bug for which we were forcing 2.2.7)
> autoconf 2.64 (higher than what we require now)
> automake 1.11/m4/pkg-config in more than recent enough versions.
> 
> corosync/openais will eventually get libtool support.
> cluster-stable3 autotool implementation is eventually on the schedule.
> cluster/master trees are already ported.
> 
> My suggestion is simply to use those versions across the projects so
> that developers will not require any longer to manually build autotools
> and can start easily testing again master trees.
> 
> Please ACK/NACK.
> 
> Fabio
> 

The sooner the better as far as I'm concerned,

Steve.

[Cluster-devel] Re: [Openais] [RFC] Proposal to align autotool versions

[Steven Dake]

On Tue, 2009-11-24 at 14:33 +0100, Fabio M. Di Nitto wrote:
> Hi guys,
> 
> I just completed testing of autotools in F13/rawhide and they seem to
> fulfill perfectly what we need so far.
> 
> Fedora13 has:
> 
> libtool 2.2.6 (doesn?t carry the bug for which we were forcing 2.2.7)
> autoconf 2.64 (higher than what we require now)
> automake 1.11/m4/pkg-config in more than recent enough versions.
> 

There is no motivation (ie bugs) to change the dependency to a later
version  autoconf for corosync.


> corosync/openais will eventually get libtool support.
> cluster-stable3 autotool implementation is eventually on the schedule.
> cluster/master trees are already ported.
> 
> My suggestion is simply to use those versions across the projects so
> that developers will not require any longer to manually build autotools
> and can start easily testing again master trees.
> 
> Please ACK/NACK.
> 
> Fabio
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Openais mailing list
> Openais at lists.linux-foundation.org
> https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/openais

[Cluster-devel] Re: [Openais] [RFC] Proposal to align autotool versions

[Fabio M. Di Nitto]

Steven Dake wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-11-24 at 14:33 +0100, Fabio M. Di Nitto wrote:
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> I just completed testing of autotools in F13/rawhide and they seem to
>> fulfill perfectly what we need so far.
>>
>> Fedora13 has:
>>
>> libtool 2.2.6 (doesn?t carry the bug for which we were forcing 2.2.7)
>> autoconf 2.64 (higher than what we require now)
>> automake 1.11/m4/pkg-config in more than recent enough versions.
>>
> 
> There is no motivation (ie bugs) to change the dependency to a later
> version  autoconf for corosync.
> 

You would end up using that version anyway. What matters mostly is to
set a minimum for libtool. The other packages are "less important"
because they are all in sufficient versions.

Fabio