Re: Automake 2.50 migration strategy, as implemented

[Ben Pfaff <pfaffben@msu.edu>]

Denis Barbier <barbier@imacs.polytechnique.fr> writes:

> most of the comments i have in mind had already been expressed by
> Marcus Brinkmann, and much better than i could, so this mail will
> be kept small.
> 
> Looking for documentation is confusing:
>      prompt$ autoconf --version
>      Autoconf version 2.13
>      prompt$ info autoconf
>      [snip] This is edition 2.50, for Autoconf version 2.50.

So what do you expect me to do in order to fix this?  autoconf is
a different binary depending on where you run it.  There is no
solution that will magically allow autoconf.info to be a
different file based on whether the current package needs 2.13 or
2.50.

> Did you file bugreports against broken packages?

There are lots of bug reports on autoconf{,2.13}.  I've fixed
some of them, the rest I'm still trying to figure out how to
properly handle.

> Because i ran across one of these compilation problems (not related to
> autoconf but to libtool), and did not yet file one to prevent
> duplication.

I don't keep track of libtool bugs.
-- 
"There's only one thing that will make them stop hating you.
 And that's being so good at what you do that they can't ignore you.
 I told them you were the best.  Now you damn well better be."
--Orson Scott Card, _Ender's Game_