On Tue, May 09, 2006 at 05:26:12PM -0700, Ben Pfaff wrote: > Autoconf 2.50 was a major change, with a long development cycle, > that had plenty of incompatibility with older releases, so that > when I packaged it for Debian I kept a compatibility package > around for Autoconf 2.13. This seems to be what other distros > and operating systems did as well. > > Autoconf 2.60 has had a long development cycle too, but I'm > hoping that it is not sufficiently different from 2.59 to make it > necessary to package it separately from 2.59. I'm basing this > mostly on the NEWS, which primarily lists new macros. However, > it does list some behavioral changes as well, e.g. the change in > the expansion of @top_builddir@ and the behavior of > AC_SUBST_FILE. > > Does anyone have input on whether these changes are cumulatively > important enough to break much software? We tried to preserve compatibility fairly well. If a change broke several existing `configure.ac', I would rather fix the problem and release Autoconf 2.61 than recommend dual distribution of Autoconf 2.59 and Autoconf 2.60. _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
