Well 1.6 actually takes these incompatibilities into account and actually provides a binary called automake-1.6 and has other mechanisms to smooth these API changes in the future. Anyway, it wouldn't be too difficult to package automake1.6 alongside the other two packages. I volunteer unless Kevin Dalley pipes up and says he wants to do it. * Ivo Timmermans (ivo@o2w.nl) wrote: > Scott James Remnant wrote: > > On Wed, 2002-06-05 at 20:12, Jordi Mallach wrote: > > > What's up with the automake packages? > > > > > The initial problem at least is that "compatible" is not a word most > > people choose to describe automake 1.4, 1.5 and 1.6. > > That's not really the point. Currently there are two automake > packages, automake (version 1.4) and automake1.5. automake 1.6 has > been available for some time, but hasn't been uploaded into sid yet. > One of my packages requires it, which is keeping some other packages > out of sid. > > > If an application was written to use automake 1.4 or before, automake > > 1.4 is the latest version of automake you can use to generate the > > Makefile.ins for it. This is the majority of applications, and will > > probably remain so for quite some time. > > Maybe, but some packages do require 1.5 or 1.6. > > > Ivo > -- Eric Dorland <dorland@lords.com> ICQ: #61138586, Jabber: hooty@jabber.com 1024D/16D970C6 097C 4861 9934 27A0 8E1C 2B0A 61E9 8ECF 16D9 70C6 -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.12 GCS d- s++: a-- C+++ UL+++ P++ L++ E++ W++ N+ o K- w+ O? M++ V-- PS+ PE Y+ PGP++ t++ 5++ X+ R tv++ b+++ DI+ D+ G e h! r- y+ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Attachment:
pgp8tP8pgktbe.pgp
Description: PGP signature