From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-155709-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 16270 invoked by alias); 1 Aug 2009 07:06:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 16259 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Aug 2009 07:06:15 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mail.gmx.net (HELO mail.gmx.net) (213.165.64.20)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with SMTP; Sat, 01 Aug 2009 07:06:06 +0000
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 01 Aug 2009 07:06:03 -0000
Received: from xdsl-87-78-124-206.netcologne.de (EHLO localhost.localdomain) [87.78.124.206]   by mail.gmx.net (mp017) with SMTP; 01 Aug 2009 09:06:03 +0200
Received: from ralf by localhost.localdomain with local (Exim 4.69) 	(envelope-from <Ralf.Wildenhues@gmx.de>) 	id 1MX8fK-0006xi-Ob; Sat, 01 Aug 2009 09:06:02 +0200
Date: Sat, 01 Aug 2009 07:06:00 -0000
From: Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf.Wildenhues@gmx.de>
To: Basile STARYNKEVITCH <basile@starynkevitch.net>
Cc: tromey@redhat.com, GCC Mailing List <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: MELT tutorial on the wiki
Message-ID: <20090801070602.GC25360@gmx.de>
Mail-Followup-To: Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf.Wildenhues@gmx.de>, 	Basile STARYNKEVITCH <basile@starynkevitch.net>, tromey@redhat.com, 	GCC Mailing List <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
References: <4A707003.8060103@starynkevitch.net>  <m3k51prhv4.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>  <4A728EE2.2050401@starynkevitch.net>  <m3eirwpwoq.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>  <m3my6kobhj.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>  <4A73DC50.5080604@starynkevitch.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4A73DC50.5080604@starynkevitch.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-15)
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2009-08/txt/msg00007.txt.bz2

* Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote on Sat, Aug 01, 2009 at 08:10:24AM CEST:
> I don"t know really how to fix that quickly! I must confess that
> autoconf related files in GCC scares me a big lot. BTW, I really
> cannot imagine why GCC still required autoconf 2.59 specifically,
> and not 2.63. What is so specific about 2.59?

I will post patches to move to 2.64 and Automake 1.11; they are ready
(I only need to finish writing the emails) but I'm off-list for the
next week starting now.  :-)

Cheers,
Ralf