Re: Automake 2.50 test summary (was: Re: Proposed Autoconf 2.50 path)
On 25 May 2001, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> My conclusion is that the number of packages that will actually
> have problems is smaller than claimed. 37 packages isn't very
> much: it's only 23% of the 161 packages that had a configure.in
> at top-level.
> I am thinking about just filing bugs against the packages with
> errors, suggesting that they be updated or adapted for use with
> the autoconf2.13 package.
> Other opinions?
Please send the bug reports. 37 packages aren't that many and the bugs are
easily to fix (by changing the build dependency to autoconf2.13).
A "No" uttered from deepest conviction is better and greater than a
"Yes" merely uttered to please, or what is worse, to avoid trouble.
-- Mahatma Ghandi