autoconf

autoconf

[Marco Atzeri]

Hi Guys,

anyone working or planning to take over the Autoconf ?

The 2.71 version seems becoming popular in some package source code.

Regards
Marco

Re: autoconf

[Achim Gratz]

Marco Atzeri via Cygwin-apps writes:
> anyone working or planning to take over the Autoconf ?

I haven't, but looking at the packages I picked up maybe I should.

> The 2.71 version seems becoming popular in some package source code.

How likely is it that they actually rely on that version already?


Regards,
Achim.
-- 
+<[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305 Neuron microQkb Andromeda XTk Blofeld]>+

Waldorf MIDI Implementation & additional documentation:
http://Synth.Stromeko.net/Downloads.html#WaldorfDocs

Re: autoconf

[Brian Inglis]

On 2021-12-01 12:56, Achim Gratz wrote:
> Marco Atzeri via Cygwin-apps writes:
>> anyone working or planning to take over the Autoconf ?

> I haven't, but looking at the packages I picked up maybe I should.

>> The 2.71 version seems becoming popular in some package source code.

> How likely is it that they actually rely on that version already?

Somewhat likely for some GNU packages and gnulib macros that specify 
version prereqs: AC_PREREQ is used in 80 packages I have sources for.

After that version released in January, I've only had to patch one 
package so far, which specified it in August, and they later reduced it 
after discussion with distro package maintainers:

$ grep 'AC_PREREQ(\[2\.[0-9]\+\])' */*.patch
bison/bison-3.7.90-revert-autoconf-upgrade.patch:-AC_PREREQ([2.71])
bison/bison-3.7.90-revert-autoconf-upgrade.patch:+AC_PREREQ([2.68])
wget2/configure-ac.upstream.patch:-AC_PREREQ([2.67])
wget2/configure-ac.upstream.patch:+AC_PREREQ([2.69])
Xcurses/x11-aclocal-m4-libtoolize.patch:+[AC_PREREQ([2.62])dnl We use 
AC_PATH_PROGS_FEATURE_CHECK

-- 
Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

This email may be disturbing to some readers as it contains
too much technical detail. Reader discretion is advised.
[Data in binary units and prefixes, physical quantities in SI.]

Re: autoconf

[ASSI]

Brian Inglis writes:
>> How likely is it that they actually rely on that version already?
>
> Somewhat likely for some GNU packages and gnulib macros that specify
> version prereqs: AC_PREREQ is used in 80 packages I have sources for.

Most distros still package 2.69 or even earlier and that includes some
substantial rolling release distros.  As long as these guys don't use
the newer version it seems unlikely that we would actually need it, plus
I don't see us spending time and effort debugging things that aren't
even Cygwin specific.

> After that version released in January, I've only had to patch one
> package so far, which specified it in August, and they later reduced
> it after discussion with distro package maintainers:
>
> $ grep 'AC_PREREQ(\[2\.[0-9]\+\])' */*.patch
> bison/bison-3.7.90-revert-autoconf-upgrade.patch:-AC_PREREQ([2.71])
> bison/bison-3.7.90-revert-autoconf-upgrade.patch:+AC_PREREQ([2.68])
> wget2/configure-ac.upstream.patch:-AC_PREREQ([2.67])
> wget2/configure-ac.upstream.patch:+AC_PREREQ([2.69])
> Xcurses/x11-aclocal-m4-libtoolize.patch:+[AC_PREREQ([2.62])dnl We use
> AC_PATH_PROGS_FEATURE_CHECK

That's called "jumping the gun" I think.  The distro package maintainers
will be in their ears immediately and we can just sit back with the
popcorn.


Regards,
Achim.
-- 
+<[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305 Neuron microQkb Andromeda XTk Blofeld]>+

SD adaptations for KORG EX-800 and Poly-800MkII V0.9:
http://Synth.Stromeko.net/Downloads.html#KorgSDada

Re: autoconf

[Corinna Vinschen]

On Dec  2 08:23, ASSI wrote:
> Brian Inglis writes:
> >> How likely is it that they actually rely on that version already?
> >
> > Somewhat likely for some GNU packages and gnulib macros that specify
> > version prereqs: AC_PREREQ is used in 80 packages I have sources for.
> 
> Most distros still package 2.69 or even earlier and that includes some
> substantial rolling release distros.  As long as these guys don't use
> the newer version it seems unlikely that we would actually need it, plus
> I don't see us spending time and effort debugging things that aren't
> even Cygwin specific.
> 
> > After that version released in January, I've only had to patch one
> > package so far, which specified it in August, and they later reduced
> > it after discussion with distro package maintainers:
> >
> > $ grep 'AC_PREREQ(\[2\.[0-9]\+\])' */*.patch
> > bison/bison-3.7.90-revert-autoconf-upgrade.patch:-AC_PREREQ([2.71])
> > bison/bison-3.7.90-revert-autoconf-upgrade.patch:+AC_PREREQ([2.68])
> > wget2/configure-ac.upstream.patch:-AC_PREREQ([2.67])
> > wget2/configure-ac.upstream.patch:+AC_PREREQ([2.69])
> > Xcurses/x11-aclocal-m4-libtoolize.patch:+[AC_PREREQ([2.62])dnl We use
> > AC_PATH_PROGS_FEATURE_CHECK
> 
> That's called "jumping the gun" I think.  The distro package maintainers
> will be in their ears immediately and we can just sit back with the
> popcorn.

gawk has moved to AC_PREREQ([2.71]) and the maintainer does not want to
go back.  I had to patch that already for Cygwin's gawk 5.1.1-1.


Corinna

Re: autoconf

[Jan Nijtmans]

Op do 2 dec. 2021 om 10:22 schreef Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin-apps:
> > Most distros still package 2.69 or even earlier and that includes some
> > substantial rolling release distros.  As long as these guys don't use
> > the newer version it seems unlikely that we would actually need it, plus
> > I don't see us spending time and effort debugging things that aren't
> > even Cygwin specific.

My 2c : Cygwin should - at least - allow people to install autoconf-2.71
and - as long as the packages are prepared for it - things shouldn't break.

If I install autoconf-2.71 locally, and then compile Tcl 8.6.12, which
contained in tcl.cygport:
    src_compile() {
        cd ${S}/unix
        cygautoreconf
        ...

$ cygport tcl.cygport compile
>>> Compiling tcl-8.6.12-1.x86_64
*** ERROR: autoconf2.5 is required to build this package


My solution was, simply to remove the "cygautoreconf" line from the
cygport file, then it works again.

Somewhere in cygport, a check is done for the autoconf version, please
change this check to allow autoconf 2.71 (as well as 2.59 and 2.69).
Then I can put back the "cygautoreconf" line in tcl.cygport.

Thanks!
          Jan Nijtmans

Re: autoconf

[Corinna Vinschen]

On Dec  2 11:15, Jan Nijtmans via Cygwin-apps wrote:

> Op do 2 dec. 2021 om 10:22 schreef Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin-apps:

Nope, I didn't.  Make that:

On Dec  2 08:23, ASSI wrote:

> > > Most distros still package 2.69 or even earlier and that includes some
> > > substantial rolling release distros.  As long as these guys don't use
> > > the newer version it seems unlikely that we would actually need it, plus
> > > I don't see us spending time and effort debugging things that aren't
> > > even Cygwin specific.
> 
> My 2c : Cygwin should - at least - allow people to install autoconf-2.71
> and - as long as the packages are prepared for it - things shouldn't break.
> 
> If I install autoconf-2.71 locally, and then compile Tcl 8.6.12, which
> contained in tcl.cygport:
>     src_compile() {
>         cd ${S}/unix
>         cygautoreconf
>         ...
> 
> $ cygport tcl.cygport compile
> >>> Compiling tcl-8.6.12-1.x86_64
> *** ERROR: autoconf2.5 is required to build this package
> 
> 
> My solution was, simply to remove the "cygautoreconf" line from the
> cygport file, then it works again.
> 
> Somewhere in cygport, a check is done for the autoconf version, please
> change this check to allow autoconf 2.71 (as well as 2.59 and 2.69).
> Then I can put back the "cygautoreconf" line in tcl.cygport.
> 
> Thanks!
>           Jan Nijtmans

Re: autoconf

[Jan Nijtmans]

Op do 2 dec. 2021 om 11:41 schreef Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin-apps:
> Nope, I didn't.  Make that:
>
> On Dec  2 08:23, ASSI wrote:

Indeed, sorry!.   I stripped a little bit too much from the message ...

Regards,
       Jan Nijtmans

Re: autoconf

[ASSI]

Jan Nijtmans via Cygwin-apps writes:
> My 2c : Cygwin should - at least - allow people to install autoconf-2.71
> and - as long as the packages are prepared for it - things shouldn't break.

As I said, I haven't looked at it in any detail, but it seems that
autoconf is already multi-version, so I guess it would be possible to
introduce an autoconf2.7 package in addition to the existing two.
That's a slightly wonky way to do that when we expect to later on just
replace 2.69 with 2.71, though.

> Somewhere in cygport, a check is done for the autoconf version, please
> change this check to allow autoconf 2.71 (as well as 2.59 and 2.69).

The check is in autotools.cygclass (with an obvious fix that you can
apply directly in the installed file):
https://cygwin.com/git/?p=cygwin-apps/cygport.git;a=blob;f=cygclass/autotools.cygclass;hb=336c67d359d7676216bc2e29fe304819505cdba0#l398

> Then I can put back the "cygautoreconf" line in tcl.cygport.

If you just removed that line it won't use the new autotools and run
with whatever Tcl was shipped with.


Regards,
Achim.
-- 
+<[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305 Neuron microQkb Andromeda XTk Blofeld]>+

Factory and User Sound Singles for Waldorf Blofeld:
http://Synth.Stromeko.net/Downloads.html#WaldorfSounds

Re: autoconf

[Corinna Vinschen]

On Dec  2 14:18, ASSI wrote:
> Jan Nijtmans via Cygwin-apps writes:
> > My 2c : Cygwin should - at least - allow people to install autoconf-2.71
> > and - as long as the packages are prepared for it - things shouldn't break.
> 
> As I said, I haven't looked at it in any detail, but it seems that
> autoconf is already multi-version, so I guess it would be possible to
> introduce an autoconf2.7 package in addition to the existing two.
> That's a slightly wonky way to do that when we expect to later on just
> replace 2.69 with 2.71, though.

Don't do that.  https://lwn.net/Articles/839395/

autoconf 2.70 and later are new, backward incompatible versions, so they
should go into a new-and-shiny-and-not-yet-existing autoconf2.7 package.


Corinna

Re: autoconf

[Ken Brown]

On 12/2/2021 8:32 AM, Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin-apps wrote:
> On Dec  2 14:18, ASSI wrote:
>> As I said, I haven't looked at it in any detail, but it seems that
>> autoconf is already multi-version, so I guess it would be possible to
>> introduce an autoconf2.7 package in addition to the existing two.
>> That's a slightly wonky way to do that when we expect to later on just
>> replace 2.69 with 2.71, though.
> 
> Don't do that.  https://lwn.net/Articles/839395/
> 
> autoconf 2.70 and later are new, backward incompatible versions, so they
> should go into a new-and-shiny-and-not-yet-existing autoconf2.7 package.

Does anyone know what other distros are doing?  The only one I checked is 
Fedora.  It looks like Fedora 35 simply replaced 2.69 by 2.71, after a long 
"heads-up" period for maintainers to fix their packages to build with 2.71.

https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/6DTWVJRXLC6SOYE6ZBO6KALWMKA2PMFM/

Ken

Re: autoconf

[Ken Brown]

On 12/2/2021 5:15 AM, Jan Nijtmans via Cygwin-apps wrote:
> Somewhere in cygport, a check is done for the autoconf version, please
> change this check to allow autoconf 2.71 (as well as 2.59 and 2.69).
> Then I can put back the "cygautoreconf" line in tcl.cygport.

You can do this locally until someone gets around to patching cygport.  Just 
patch /usr/share/cygclass/autotools.cygclass like this:

--- autotools.cygclass~ 2020-05-10 12:06:42.000000000 -0400
+++ autotools.cygclass  2021-12-02 08:14:34.546334100 -0500
@@ -395,7 +395,7 @@
                 WANT_AUTOCONF=2.5

                 case $(autoconf --version 2> /dev/null | head -n 1) in
-                       autoconf*2.[56]?) ;;
+                       autoconf*2.[567]?) ;;
                         *)      error "autoconf2.5 is required to build this 
package" ;;
                 esac


Ken

Re: autoconf

[Achim Gratz]

Ken Brown via Cygwin-apps writes:
> On 12/2/2021 5:15 AM, Jan Nijtmans via Cygwin-apps wrote:
>> Somewhere in cygport, a check is done for the autoconf version, please
>> change this check to allow autoconf 2.71 (as well as 2.59 and 2.69).
>> Then I can put back the "cygautoreconf" line in tcl.cygport.
>
> You can do this locally until someone gets around to patching cygport.
> Just patch /usr/share/cygclass/autotools.cygclass like this:
>
> --- autotools.cygclass~ 2020-05-10 12:06:42.000000000 -0400
> +++ autotools.cygclass  2021-12-02 08:14:34.546334100 -0500
> @@ -395,7 +395,7 @@
>                 WANT_AUTOCONF=2.5
>
>                 case $(autoconf --version 2> /dev/null | head -n 1) in
> -                       autoconf*2.[56]?) ;;
> +                       autoconf*2.[567]?) ;;
>                         *)      error "autoconf2.5 is required to
>                          build this package" ;;
>                 esac

In light of the fact that 2.71 again is not backwards compatible, that
patch needs to be somewhat more extensive and include different
WANT_AUTOCONF settings.


Regards,
Achim.
-- 
+<[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305 Neuron microQkb Andromeda XTk Blofeld]>+

Waldorf MIDI Implementation & additional documentation:
http://Synth.Stromeko.net/Downloads.html#WaldorfDocs

Re: autoconf

[Achim Gratz]

Achim Gratz writes:
> In light of the fact that 2.71 again is not backwards compatible, that
> patch needs to be somewhat more extensive and include different
> WANT_AUTOCONF settings.

Something like this, which keeps the default autoconf version at 2.69
for the moment (and is untested right now).

--- /usr/share/cygport/cygclass/autotools.cygclass
+++ #<buffer autotools.cygclass>
@@ -391,12 +391,21 @@
 			warning "libtool is incompatible with autoconf-2.13";
 		fi
 		;;
-	2.5|'')
-		WANT_AUTOCONF=2.5
-
-		case $(autoconf --version 2> /dev/null | head -n 1) in
+	2.5|2.7|2.71|'')
+		case "${WANT_AUTOCONF}" in
+		2.5|'')
+			WANT_AUTOCONF=2.5
+			case $(autoconf --version 2> /dev/null | head -n 1) in
 			autoconf*2.[56]?) ;;
 			*)	error "autoconf2.5 is required to build this package" ;;
+			esac
+			;;
+		2.7|2.71)
+			WANT_AUTOCONF=2.71
+			case $(autoconf --version 2> /dev/null | head -n 1) in
+			autoconf*2.[7]?) ;;
+			*)	error "autoconf2.7 is required to build this package" ;;
+			esac
 		esac
 
 		if __config_equals with_libtool 1


Regards,
Achim.
-- 
+<[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305 Neuron microQkb Andromeda XTk Blofeld]>+

DIY Stuff:
http://Synth.Stromeko.net/DIY.html