On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 04:32:34PM -0700, Eric Blake wrote:
According to Diego Elio ???Flameeyes??? Pettenò on 1/23/2010 3:55 PM:
Il giorno sab, 23/01/2010 alle 15.47 -0700, Eric Blake ha scritto:
Or is it too soon to expect all distros to have an automake that new pre-installed, and more effort be put into supporting automake 1.9.6 and autoconf 2.59 (those being the implicit minimum requirements due to the use of gnulib)? Or somewhere in between?
I asked about that as well a few days ago, seems like the lower bound is RHEL-5 which means nothing more than autoconf 2.59 can be used :(
There's a difference between supporting tarballs on RHEL-5 (where the version of autoconf and automake is irrelevant, since you don't have to run the autotools to build from a tarball) and actually developing on RHEL-5 (where the developer has to install prerequisites like newer autotools if the package decides to require newer autotools). Is there anyone that seriously falls in the latter category, of still wanting to _develop_ libvirt on RHEL-5?
Yes, because we need to make sure that libvirt continues to work with the RHEL-5 era Xen platform, and this requires being able to fully build from GIT source. Daniel -- |: Red Hat, Engineering, London -o- http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org -o- http://ovirt.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: GnuPG: 7D3B9505 -o- F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :|