new autotools

[Frantisek Kluknavsky]

On 03/29/2013 05:50 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Thursday 28 March 2013 19:52:14 Vincent Lefevre wrote:
>> On 2013-03-28 14:23:57 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>> On Thursday 28 March 2013 12:00:28 Frantisek Kluknavsky wrote:
>>>> Is there any intention to use newer automake/autoconf with future
>>>> releases of gmp? If I am not mistaken, gmp 5.1.1 can not recognize
>>>> 64-bit arm. Recent autoconf can already do this.
>>> why are you guys going out and bugging every random upstream
>>> maintainer ? why isn't your package manager automatically updating
>>> config.{sub,guess} in place ?
>> FYI, not everyone uses a package manager. Tarballs should be designed
>> to work on their own.
> i didn't say otherwise.  these packages will automatically get updated as the
> developers update their build tools and make new releases.  but putting out a
> new release purely for updating these two files is asinine.
>
> if you're actively working on the bleeding edge (and it currently doesn't get
> much more bleeding than aarch64 as there isn't any actual hardware yet), then
> you know what you're doing, and you don't need every random upstream package
> maintainer to regenerate their files, nor can you even do so (as there are many
> many dormant/dead upstreams out there).
> -mike
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gmp-discuss mailing list
> gmp-discuss at gmplib.org
> https://gmplib.org/mailman/listinfo/gmp-discuss

Sorry,

I do not know anything about arm64, just forwarding message from our arm 
people. Without any real possibility to test, I had to believe them. 
(They say false positives are "few and far between".)

Maybe it was not clear enough or polite enough from me. My English is 
poor. I did not want you to make a new release because of autoconf. I 
wanted to make sure that new autoconf will be used in future releases. 
If you already support aarch64, it is all useless spam anyway.

Sorry again.