From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31129 invoked by alias); 17 Jan 2003 23:26:50 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 31116 invoked from network); 17 Jan 2003 23:26:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smtp5.wanadoo.nl) (194.134.35.176) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 17 Jan 2003 23:26:46 -0000 Received: from steven.lr-s.tudelft.nl (3eea16a1.cable.wanadoo.nl [62.234.22.161]) by smtp5.wanadoo.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82A15747DD; Sat, 18 Jan 2003 00:26:43 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: Configure magic From: Steven Bosscher To: Zack Weinberg Cc: dnovillo@redhat.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <87of6ficvk.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com> References: <1042844223.759.8.camel@steven> <87of6ficvk.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 07:51:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1042846051.759.14.camel@steven> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2003-01/txt/msg00855.txt.bz2 Op za 18-01-2003, om 00:18 schreef Zack Weinberg: > Steven Bosscher writes: > > > Diego, > > > > Since your merge, I cannot configure anymore without cheating: > > ... > > > # autoconf --version > > autoconf (GNU Autoconf) 2.52 > > Written by David J. MacKenzie. > > ... > > > Do I really need to get an *old* autoconf somewhere to make > > a *new* gcc work? > > Yes, you really do. Only 2.13 will work. People are trying to > rectify this, perhaps you could lend them a hand? If I knew more about autoconf... If there's anything I can help with, I certainly would. The sooner GCC uses a more recent autoconf, the better. Old autoconfs are a problem for the G95 project. For g95 we're using a patched autoconf 2.5x because unpatched autoconf think that f90 files can be compiled with g77, which is kind of inconvenient if you're trying to develop a Fortran 95 compiler :-) Greetz Steven