<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 TRANSITIONAL//EN"> <HTML> <HEAD> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; CHARSET=UTF-8"> <META NAME="GENERATOR" CONTENT="GtkHTML/3.26.0"> </HEAD> <BODY> On Mon, 2010-08-16 at 11:40 -0700, Barton C Massey wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE> <TT>IMHO, it would be perfectly reasonable to raise the required</TT> <TT>versions of autoconf/automake for all of X.  I'd prefer that</TT> <TT>to some kludge that makes things work with older autoconf.</TT> </BLOCKQUOTE> I have been pushing to move from 2.57 (2002!) to 2.60. Some packages would not configure under 2.57. That was the justification. I wouldn't go as far as saying we need to revert to kludges. Just normal looping as the macro does not do it for us. <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE> <TT>autoconf 2.60 was released in June 2006, and 2.61 in</TT> <TT>November 2006.  I don't think that we're going to cripple</TT> <TT>anyone by requiring this "later" version.</TT> </BLOCKQUOTE> We are talking 2.62 here, which is just 2 years behind (2008). It's not available (as a distro installable package) in Hardy LTS for example and probably not on Solaris. Suggestion: you can use this macro in xcb, forcing the issue of upgrading. Anyone who wants to build xcb has to upgrade. If we put it in util-macros, everyone need to upgrade their computer overnight to build any of the 240 packages. After a while, when people have upgraded, we can promote the macro to util-macros without compatibility issues for xcb. I am far from being against upgrading, in this case the code would be ahead of the installed toolchain. We would be ok to use automake 1.10 however. Gaetan </BODY> </HTML>