On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 3:57 PM Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 03:33:41PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 3:30 PM Andy Shevchenko > > <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 09:38:44AM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > > > > On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 2:55 PM Andy Shevchenko > > > > <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 02:23:01PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > > ... > > > > > > One side note, though. Are you already plan to support autotools-2.70? > > > > > > > > Isn't it already supported? 2.69 is the minimum version, 2.70 should just work. > > > > > > Have you read an article on LWN about changes [1]? There are a lot of > > > incompatibilities (note between 2.69 and 2.70 _8_ years passed). > > > > > > [1]: https://lwn.net/Articles/839395/ > > > > How will distros handle the incompatibilities? I don't think all > > projects - many no longer even supported - will suddenly switch to new > > autoconf. > > It's PITA for distributions. Last time I remember that nice jump from 2.13 to 2.50. > However, 2.69 should be closer to 2.70. I believe the distributions will patch > all broken packages one-by-one. I think there is no need to keep two autoconf > packages together in this case, but who knows, it might be a last resort. > > -- > With Best Regards, > Andy Shevchenko > > Ok, so responding to your question: I'll upgrade to 2.70 once it's necessary. :) Bart