* Josh Triplett (josh@joshtriplett.org) wrote: > Eric Dorland wrote: > > * Paul Wise (pabs@debian.org) wrote: > > > Shouldn't automake1.4 be first in the queue? > > > > We could do automake1.4. I hesitate because there may still be older > > software out there that wants automake 1.4's particular set of > > quirks. What do other people think? > > Why does automake 1.4 (from 1999) in particular have more software stuck > on it? I haven't managed to find any information about its quirks that > explains why old software wants 1.4 in particular. The versions after 1.4 were where backwards-incompatible changes started showing up. As a very unscientific census using google code search, there are about 36,800 Makefile.in's generated by automake 1.4 on the web, versus 113,000 generated by automake 1.6 and later. Now clearly we don't need automake 1.4 for Debian's sake, but some users might still be interested in it for some people to compile old pieces of software. If there's no such interest, then I have no problems dropping it. PS Searches I used: http://www.google.com/codesearch#search/&q=%22Makefile.in%20generated%20automatically%20by%20automake%22%20-1.2%20-1.3%20-1.5%20file:Makefile.in&type=cs http://www.google.com/codesearch#search/&q=%22Makefile.in%20generated%20by%20automake%22%20file:Makefile.in&type=cs > - Josh Triplett > > -- Eric Dorland <eric@kuroneko.ca> ICQ: #61138586, Jabber: hooty@jabber.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature