From: Zack Weinberg <zack@owlfolio.org>
To: Wookey <wookey@wookware.org>
Cc: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>, <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>,
c-std-porting@lists.linux.dev, autoconf@gnu.org,
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org, Frederic Berat <fberat@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: How can Autoconf help with the transition to stricter compilation defaults?
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2022 11:12:38 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ypiko7tcb18p.fsf@owlfolio.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221112155952.GM27919@mail.wookware.org> (wookey@wookware.org's message of "Sat, 12 Nov 2022 15:59:52 +0000")
Wookey <wookey@wookware.org> writes:
> On 2022-11-10 19:08 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> based on a limited attempt to get this fixed about three years
>> ago, I expect that many of the problematic packages have not had their
>> configure scripts regenerated using autoconf for a decade or more. This
>> means that as an autoconf maintainer, you unfortunately won't be able to
>> help us much.
>
> We changed the default in debian to re-autoconf on build a few years
> ago precisely so that changes in the tools (particularly new arch
> support) were picked up even by code that was not being re-released or
> released without autofoo updates. This has worked remarkably well.
>
> So changes in the tools will get used, at least in that context, which
> includes a fairly hefty pile of crufty old code. I have no feeling for
> how many packages are actually affected by this. Is there a quick way to test?
In the run-up to Autoconf 2.70 I got Lucas to do a Debian archive
rebuild and mass bug filing, so, look through Debian packages for
patches being carried for configure.ac and/or bundled .m4 files?
zw
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-11-12 16:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 65+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-11-10 17:16 Zack Weinberg
2022-11-10 17:52 ` Nick Bowler
2022-11-10 17:58 ` Jonathan Wakely
2022-11-10 18:12 ` Jonathan Wakely
2022-11-10 18:44 ` Aaron Ballman
2022-11-12 2:56 ` Zack Weinberg
2022-11-10 18:05 ` Rich Felker
2022-11-10 21:44 ` Florian Weimer
2022-11-12 3:22 ` Zack Weinberg
2022-11-10 18:08 ` Florian Weimer
2022-11-12 3:40 ` Zack Weinberg
2022-11-12 3:43 ` Sam James
2022-11-12 14:27 ` Zack Weinberg
2022-11-12 3:45 ` Joseph Myers
2022-11-12 15:59 ` Wookey
2022-11-12 16:12 ` Zack Weinberg [this message]
2022-11-10 18:19 ` Aaron Ballman
2022-11-10 21:05 ` Paul Eggert
2022-11-11 15:11 ` Aaron Ballman
2022-11-13 0:43 ` Paul Eggert
2022-11-14 12:41 ` Aaron Ballman
2022-11-14 18:14 ` Paul Eggert
2022-11-14 18:30 ` Florian Weimer
2022-11-14 18:35 ` Aaron Ballman
2022-11-15 14:50 ` Jonathan Wakely
2022-11-15 19:08 ` Paul Eggert
2022-11-15 19:27 ` Jonathan Wakely
2022-11-15 20:27 ` Paul Eggert
2022-11-15 20:57 ` Aaron Ballman
2022-11-15 23:09 ` Paul Eggert
2022-11-15 23:43 ` Ben Boeckel
2022-11-16 14:26 ` Michael Matz
2022-11-16 14:40 ` Alexander Monakov
2022-11-16 15:01 ` Michael Matz
2022-11-16 15:27 ` Richard Biener
2022-11-16 15:35 ` Sam James
2022-11-16 15:59 ` Michael Matz
2022-11-16 16:20 ` Jonathan Wakely
2022-11-16 16:34 ` Michael Matz
2022-11-16 16:46 ` Jonathan Wakely
2022-11-16 18:17 ` Paul Eggert
2022-11-16 18:40 ` Jeffrey Walton
2022-11-17 18:45 ` Paul Eggert
2022-11-16 18:59 ` Zack Weinberg
2022-11-17 18:58 ` Paul Eggert
2022-11-17 21:35 ` Bruno Haible
2022-11-17 22:27 ` Paul Eggert
2022-11-17 13:30 ` Michael Matz
2022-11-15 20:36 ` Aaron Ballman
2022-11-15 5:03 ` Sam James
2022-11-15 13:30 ` Zack Weinberg
2022-11-15 13:34 ` Sam James
2022-11-16 0:08 ` Bob Friesenhahn
2022-11-13 0:43 ` Paul Eggert
2022-11-17 13:57 ` Jason Merrill
2022-11-10 20:19 ` Paul Eggert
[not found] ` <d785b19371e8419f5a5817d7cdb429db91614a3a.camel@orlitzky.com>
2022-11-11 3:08 ` Sam James
2022-11-11 3:33 ` Zack Weinberg
2022-11-11 8:40 ` Sam James
2022-11-11 9:02 ` Paul Eggert
2022-11-12 14:09 ` Zack Weinberg
2022-11-11 23:25 ` Sam James
2022-11-12 0:53 ` Paul Eggert
2022-11-12 4:00 ` Sam James
2022-11-11 9:15 ` Sam James
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ypiko7tcb18p.fsf@owlfolio.org \
--to=zack@owlfolio.org \
--cc=autoconf@gnu.org \
--cc=c-std-porting@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org \
--cc=fberat@redhat.com \
--cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=wookey@wookware.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).