Re: autoconf version for back branches? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew Dunstan
Subject Re: autoconf version for back branches?
Date
Msg-id 44FB881E.2050004@dunslane.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: autoconf version for back branches?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: autoconf version for back branches?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: autoconf version for back branches?  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
List pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
>   
>> I see that older back branches are still using version 2.53 of autoconf, 
>> rather than the 2.59 branch we have updated to for 8.1 and beyond. Does 
>> that mean I need to install version 2.53 if I want to update the config 
>> on those branches?
>>     
>
> Yup.  We aren't changing back autoconf versions if we can help it ---
> too much risk of breakage.
>
>   
>> If so, fixing the plpython problem I reported 
>> recently seems like too much work.
>>     
>
> It's not a big problem if you install 'em into private subdirectories,
> eg I have autoconf-2.53 installed with --prefix = /usr/local/autoconf-2.53
> and do
>     PATH=/usr/local/autoconf-2.53/bin:$PATH autoconf
> when I need to update back-branch configure scripts.
>
>     
>   

Ah! Thanks! What had failed for me was just running with 
/path/to/old/autoconf - this one works however. Strange that a config 
package can't work out where its own installed files are.

cheers

andrew



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Interval month, week -> day
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] pgstattuple extension for indexes