From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <libc-alpha-return-53130-listarch-libc-alpha=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 9032 invoked by alias); 26 Sep 2014 22:36:24 -0000
Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <libc-alpha.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:libc-alpha-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/>
List-Post: <mailto:libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 9022 invoked by uid 89); 26 Sep 2014 22:36:23 -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 <roland@hack.frob.com>
To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
Cc: GNU C Library <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: Should we require autoconf 2.69?
In-Reply-To: H.J. Lu's message of  Thursday, 18 September 2014 08:31:42 -0700 <CAMe9rOrFPpCabVhLJ5O=A+NrSjyk-9q6t30N9nN6areLzebc8w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAMe9rOo+U8GFLNdEb0CFuQBC=z7ZDnasMUyYy3mNphokJF6GjQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20140917193336.EC3812C26C5@topped-with-meat.com>
	<CAMe9rOqt8xkmtOGAZJ9mujmhSPfpSZ776z=nM_8fGrJ=cy9AcQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20140917203404.4EE492C397A@topped-with-meat.com>
	<CAMe9rOrFPpCabVhLJ5O=A+NrSjyk-9q6t30N9nN6areLzebc8w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-Id: <20140926223619.CDB5B2C39D6@topped-with-meat.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 22:36:00 -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=Z6MIti7PxpgA:10
		a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=hOe2yjtxAAAA:8 a=fpHjPhSA6Y7ALwyfqq8A:9
		a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10
X-SW-Source: 2014-09/txt/msg00627.txt.bz2

It's OK by me.