[Xcb] Splitting up xcb-util repository

Gaetan Nadon memsize at videotron.ca
Mon Aug 16 12:49:48 PDT 2010

On Mon, 2010-08-16 at 11:40 -0700, Barton C Massey wrote:

> IMHO, it would be perfectly reasonable to raise the required
> versions of autoconf/automake for all of X.  I'd prefer that
> to some kludge that makes things work with older autoconf.

I have been pushing to move from 2.57 (2002!) to 2.60.
Some packages would not configure under 2.57. That was the

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.

> autoconf 2.60 was released in June 2006, and 2.61 in
> November 2006.  I don't think that we're going to cripple
> anyone by requiring this "later" version.

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
and probably not on Solaris.

Suggestion: you can use this macro in xcb, forcing the issue of
Anyone who wants to build xcb has to upgrade. If we put it in
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
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.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xcb/attachments/20100816/3c0b4852/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xcb/attachments/20100816/3c0b4852/attachment.pgp>

More information about the Xcb mailing list