From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21099 invoked by alias); 2 Dec 2003 21:40:03 -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 21081 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2003 21:40:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.73.237.138) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 2 Dec 2003 21:40:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 8603 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2003 21:34:52 -0000 Received: from taltos.codesourcery.com (zack@66.92.218.83) by mail.codesourcery.com with DES-CBC3-SHA encrypted SMTP; 2 Dec 2003 21:34:52 -0000 Received: by taltos.codesourcery.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 2 Dec 2003 13:40:01 -0800 From: "Zack Weinberg" To: Paul Eggert Cc: Ben Elliston , gcc@gcc.gnu.org, binutils@sources.redhat.com, gdb@sources.redhat.com, rms@gnu.org Subject: Re: flag day for Solaris portions of config.{guess,sub} References: <8765hf4c8z.fsf@wasabisystems.com> <87wu9mt79r.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com> <871xrs5b9j.fsf@penguin.cs.ucla.edu> <87znegqb31.fsf@codesourcery.com> <87brqsw9d9.fsf@penguin.cs.ucla.edu> <871xroqlaf.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com> <87n0aaj4cl.fsf@penguin.cs.ucla.edu> Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2003 21:45:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <87n0aaj4cl.fsf@penguin.cs.ucla.edu> (Paul Eggert's message of "02 Dec 2003 13:29:30 -0800") Message-ID: <87wu9esxu6.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2003-12/txt/msg00201.txt.bz2 Paul Eggert writes: > "Zack Weinberg" writes: > >> I think it's roughly comparable to the disruption involved in the >> switch from autoconf 2.13 to autoconf 2.5x -- every last configure >> script on the planet is going to have to be audited for problems, > > This overstates the amount of work that will need to be done, as the > vast majority of configure scripts will not be affected by this change, > whereas the switch from Autoconf 2.13 to 2.5x required changes to most > configure.in files. The burden is on you to prove that - in the absence of evidence we must assume that most or all configure scripts *will* have to be modified; certainly they will all have to be *examined*, which is a nontrivial amount of work in itself. And you completely ignored the issue of non-autoconf users of config.sub/guess. zw