Re: [SCM] GNU Libtool branch, master, updated. v2.2.4-45-gc2b8636

[Ralf Wildenhues]

* Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Sun, Sep 07, 2008 at 09:06:59AM CEST:
> On 7 Sep 2008, at 06:41, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
>> * Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Sat, Sep 06, 2008 at 11:12:33PM CEST:
>>>    Prepare for next stable release.
>>>    * libltdl/Makefile.inc (LTDL_VERSION_INFO): Update.
>>>    * libltdl/m4/libtool.m4: Bump serial number to account for
>>>    changes since 2.2.4 release.
>>>    * INSTALL, config/config.guess, config/texinfo.tex: Updated
>>>    from canonical source.
>>>    * configure.ac (AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE): Specify dist-lzma, which
>>
>> No please don't!  Why do we have to force Automake >= 1.10.1
>> upon people bootstrapping Libtool?
>>
>> Note that, even without dist-lzma, it works to issue
>>  make dist-lzma
>
> Okay, I'll revert that in master after the release tag.

Fine with me, thanks.  You can probably just leave it in, too:
when the next stable release is out, it likely won't be so much
of an issue any more...

> Why is Automake >= 1.10.1 an issue though?  It's been around for
> almost a year...

But some distros still have two-year latencies for stable -> stable
releases.

>> iff you happen to be using new-enough Automake.
>>
>>>    was introduced after automake-1.10 was released.
>>>    (abs_top_srcdir, abs_top_builddir): No need to substitute these
>>>    from configure anymore, since we require automake 1.10.1, which
>>>    does perform the substitutions properly.
>>
>> Hmm.
>
> And it lets us clean out some of the workaround cruft from our
> configure.ac.

Good point.

>>> --- a/libltdl/Makefile.inc
>>> +++ b/libltdl/Makefile.inc
>>> @@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ AM_CPPFLAGS              += -DLT_CONFIG_H='<$ 
>>> (LT_CONFIG_H)>' \
>>>                       -DLTDL -I. -I$(srcdir) -Ilibltdl \
>>>                       -I$(srcdir)/libltdl -I$(srcdir)/libltdl/libltdl
>>> AM_LDFLAGS         += -no-undefined
>>> -LTDL_VERSION_INFO  = -version-info 8:2:1
>>> +LTDL_VERSION_INFO  = -version-info 9:0:0
>>
>> Why?  Was there an incompatible change that I missed?
>
> We removed a bunch of argz interfaces from the exported interface.

But they were there only by accident, and never intended nor documented.
I'm not sure if that counts as incompatible change.

Actually, I had hoped that the 2.2.x branch wouldn't need any major ltdl
version bumps, sigh.

Cheers,
Ralf