Re: newlib: require autoconf-2.69
Corinna Vinschen <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lib.newlib |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Jan 10 19:58, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On 10 Jan 2022 10:02, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > On Jan 7 14:09, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > > On 07 Jan 2022 10:58, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > > > On Jan 6 01:10, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > > > > On 05 Jan 2022 20:46, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > > > > > do you want me to update newlib/ & libgloss/ to leverage this macro ? > > > > > > > > > > looks like it's just as easy as passing -I to the top-level config dir when > > > > > running aclocal. since override.m4 overrides AC_INIT, it forces the version > > > > > lock logic. example diff for newlib/ is below. > > > > > > > > > > lmk what you prefer here. > > > > > > > > No worries. I guess it's really better to stick to the same autoconf > > > > requirements as gcc/binutils-gdb. > > > > > > is that an approval to push the override.m4 approach ? :) > > > > That was an approval to push your original patch as is, but I'd like > > an approach to tweak and use override.m4 better, me thinks. Do you > > want to submit a patch for this? > > i've posted two patches at this point. the first one in this thread which only > changed the AC_PREREQ lines, and a second one to leverage override.m4: > https://sourceware.org/pipermail/newlib/2022/018829.html > granted, it wasn't every single subdir, but that example patch is what i used > everywhere and the resulting diff was basically copied & pasted. The second one. It was just inlined diff, not a patch submission, so I was basically asking to create a real git formatted patch from there. IOW, let's utilize override.m4 and bump _GCC_AUTOCONF_VERSION to 2.69. Is that ok? Corinna