"Zack Weinberg" <zack@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 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
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
