From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17594 invoked by alias); 17 Sep 2014 20:34:12 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 17563 invoked by uid 89); 17 Sep 2014 20:34:07 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: topped-with-meat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Roland McGrath To: "H.J. Lu" Cc: GNU C Library Subject: Re: Should we require autoconf 2.69? In-Reply-To: H.J. Lu's message of Wednesday, 17 September 2014 13:11:47 -0700 References: <20140917193336.EC3812C26C5@topped-with-meat.com> Message-Id: <20140917203404.4EE492C397A@topped-with-meat.com> Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2014 20:34:00 -0000 X-CMAE-Score: 0 X-CMAE-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=SvUDtp+0 c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=WkljmVdYkabdwxfqvArNOQ==:117 a=14OXPxybAAAA:8 a=PzjYW59HMBgA:10 a=NCHkxsf0WWwA:10 a=Z6MIti7PxpgA:10 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=hOe2yjtxAAAA:8 a=7VnUYsmSg3Kh4ewDyRcA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=4THjByPBwXIA:10 a=vQBqSQnbfZYA:10 X-SW-Source: 2014-09/txt/msg00441.txt.bz2 > On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Roland McGrath wrote: > > If you make sure the GLIBC_PROVIDES magic in aclocal.m4 is still right, > > then it's fine with me. > > What should I look for? I didn't get any error messages with autoconf 2.69. Basically you should regenerate all the sysdeps/.../configure files and eyeball the diffs for sanity. If any of them inflates a lot or anything else bizarre-looking, then we have a problem.