Re: new snapshot available: autoconf-2.72c

Sam James <[email protected]> Mon, 27 Mar 2023 18:45:34 +0100

Newsgroups	gmane.comp.sysutils.autoconf.general
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

"Zack Weinberg" <[email protected]> writes:

> On Mon, Mar 27, 2023, at 11:38 AM, Jim Meyering wrote:
>> We're overdue for a new release, so here's a snapshot in preparation
>> for that, which I want to call 2.73 (skipping 2.72).  There has never
>> been an autoconf-2.72 release, yet `git describe` now prints 2.72c and
>> has been printing strings like v2.72a-92-g8db00aa8 for years.
>
> Just as a note, I thought this version numbering scheme was weird too the first time I encountered it, but the historical practice has been that 2.72a, 2.72b, 2.72c, etc. are beta releases of 2.72.

FWIW, the historical practice doesn't work very well for at least
Gentoo's package manager, and I believe this is true for other
distributions too.

That is, 2.72a > 2.72, although 2.72_alpha < 2.72. So Jim's decision
in this case has worked well here at least.
>
>>   https://meyering.net/ac/autoconf-ss.tar.xz      1.4 MB
>>   https://meyering.net/ac/autoconf-ss.tar.xz.sig
>>   https://meyering.net/ac/autoconf-2.72c.tar.xz
>
> Are you able to upload this to ftp.gnu.org as an official beta?
>

or alpha.gnu.org, I suppose.

>> NEWS
>> =====================================
> ...
>>       Port to compilers that moan about K&R func decls
>>       More fixes for compilers that reject K&R function definitions.
>
> Compatibility with compilers that reject unprototyped function declarations should maybe get a more prominent NEWS entry.
>

Yeah, given it's the impetus.

> zw

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 377 B)