Re: 4.1.0 Release Candidate: gnats-4_1_0-rc2

David S Gathright wrote:
> What's the timeframe looking like for the 4.1 release?  We're about to
> move into a (much) larger scale deployment of the GNATS system and I'd
> prefer not to upgrade the GNATS system just after that.

I'm CC'ing [email protected] to soliciting opinions.  I wanted to make
sure we could build on all platforms before releasing.  I believe there
were a couple FreeBSD issues with rc1 [1]_ that I hope have gone away
now that we've dropped libiberty and friends.

We need some testing, essentially.  Once we confirm that everything
compiles on platforms that GNATS is used, I'll tag the release in CVS
and roll the tarball.

One thing that I've run in to is making sure that getdate.c doesn't get
recompiled using bison > 1.35.  Bison 1.875d, the default on Debian,
does not produce viable output with our getdate.y file. This might be a
good candidate for gnulib addition.  I'll send a bug to bug-gnats.  In
any case, if you don't rebuild getdate.c or if you use bison 1.35,
everything seems to compile just fine.

.. [1] http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnats/2004-11/msg00012.html

-- 
Chad Walstrom <[email protected]>           http://www.wookimus.net/
           assert(expired(knowledge)); /* core dump */

_______________________________________________
Help-gnats mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-gnats

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCI1UeDMcLGCBsWv0RAviWAJ9Uem9tDvkrQAUMVhGjaWlLb8tg7QCfUhOb
f44uRg+Cz3/KExP9hTthBPw=
=Qgci
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----