RetroSearch Browse

Thu Oct 14 21:05:42 CEST 2010 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-October/104703.html

2010/10/14 "Martin v. Löwis" <martin at v.loewis.de>:
>>> I think it was intentional (at least deliberate), but I think it is a
>>> problem and should be reverted. There is, at any point, the official
>>> version that Python uses for autoconf, which at the moment is 2.65.
>>> The rationale is that with changing autoconf versions, the actual
>>> configure script will change forth and back, confusing attributions
>>> (svn blame).
>>
>> Why would anyone annotate configure? configure.in is stable wrt to
>> autoconf versions.
>
> Ok, it's more an issue with aesthetics, and also reproducibility
> (what if somebody tests a configure change correctly, but it then
> breaks with an older autoconf version?)
>
> However, if people don't see this as a problem, we can also give
> up the strictness of requiring an exact autoconf version (and
> autoconf will already check for a minimum).

I don't see it as any more of a problem than upgrading against other
dependencies (like gcc?).

-- 
Regards,
Benjamin

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-October/104703.html below:

[Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] r85486 - python/branches/py3k/configure