[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
re: new vs old autoconf / Re: checking for non-standard headers
From: |
Thomas E. Dickey |
Subject: |
re: new vs old autoconf / Re: checking for non-standard headers |
Date: |
Tue, 12 Aug 2003 15:38:38 -0400 (EDT) |
On Tue, 12 Aug 2003, Guido Draheim wrote:
> of another file. In all other cases, I'm quite fine... what features
> are overdue by your records, Thomas?
I suppose you could look at the cvs version and answer your own question.
I recall seeing a half-dozen serious bugs reported - and fixed - since
2.57, making the difference at least as much as from 2.54 to 2.57. (2.55
& 2.56 were blunders, of course - read the changelog).
--
T.E.Dickey <address@hidden>
http://invisible-island.net
ftp://invisible-island.net
- checking for non-standard headers, Larry Siden, 2003/08/11
- Re: checking for non-standard headers, Braden McDaniel, 2003/08/11
- Re: checking for non-standard headers, Guido Draheim, 2003/08/11
- Message not available
- Re: checking for non-standard headers, Guido Draheim, 2003/08/12
- Re: checking for non-standard headers, Thomas Dickey, 2003/08/12
- re: new vs old autoconf / Re: checking for non-standard headers, Guido Draheim, 2003/08/12
- re: new vs old autoconf / Re: checking for non-standard headers,
Thomas E. Dickey <=
- Re: new vs old autoconf / Re: checking for non-standard headers, Guido Draheim, 2003/08/12
- Re: new vs old autoconf / Re: checking for non-standard headers, Thomas E. Dickey, 2003/08/12
- Re: new vs old autoconf / Re: checking for non-standard headers, Guido Draheim, 2003/08/13
- Re: new vs old autoconf / Re: checking for non-standard headers, Thomas E. Dickey, 2003/08/13
- Re: new vs old autoconf / Re: checking for non-standard headers, Russ Allbery, 2003/08/12
- Re: new vs old autoconf / Re: checking for non-standard headers, Akim Demaille, 2003/08/25