| |||||||||||||
KS2011: Afternoon topicsKS2011: Afternoon topicsPosted Oct 30, 2011 21:31 UTC (Sun) by foom (subscriber, #14868)In reply to: KS2011: Afternoon topics by josh Parent article: KS2011: Afternoon topics
> Automake has remained mostly backward compatible since after 1.4
Yet, it's still necessary for Debian to include automake 1.4, 1.7, 1.9, 1.10, and 1.11, and autoconf 2.13, 2.59, 2.64, and 2.67.
If it were that easy to upgrade, I'd expect that everything would've been converted to at least automake 1.10 by now (which came out in 2006).
(Log in to post comments)
KS2011: Afternoon topics Posted Oct 30, 2011 23:11 UTC (Sun) by cortana (subscriber, #24596) [Link]
Are those old autoconf/automake packages shipped in order to resolve build-dependencies for other packages in the archive, or are they shipped so that end users can still build their software which may be less well-maintained than your typical open source project?
KS2011: Afternoon topics Posted Nov 1, 2011 2:42 UTC (Tue) by foom (subscriber, #14868) [Link]
> Are those old autoconf/automake packages shipped in order to resolve build-dependencies for other packages in the archive
Yes. Some reference material.
http://lists.debian.org/debian-qa/2011/03/msg00039.html
KS2011: Afternoon topics Posted Nov 4, 2011 0:36 UTC (Fri) by geofft (subscriber, #59789) [Link] Debian includes those because there hasn't been a huge reason not to. There's been discussion about removing some of them, and some thoughts about removing 1.4 -- it's definitely only in Debian for users' convenience, not because other things in Debian depend on it.
KS2011: Afternoon topics Posted Nov 7, 2011 0:23 UTC (Mon) by foom (subscriber, #14868) [Link]
Nope, still not unused: there's 3 packages remaining build-depending on it in unstable, down from 30 in lenny and 8 in squeeze. (counting packages in main only). And of course that's not looking at packages whose maintainers aren't calling automake at all, but are shipping pre-built files generated with automake 1.4.
|
|||||||||||||