[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: RFC: 77-gary-diagnose-version-mismatch.patch
From: |
Scott James Remnant |
Subject: |
Re: RFC: 77-gary-diagnose-version-mismatch.patch |
Date: |
Mon, 02 Feb 2004 11:38:38 +0000 |
On Mon, 2004-02-02 at 10:49, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
> Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
> | Note that if AC_LIBTOOL_TAGS is removed, both CVS Autoconf and
> | CVS Automake need to be changed. This is not problem, since
> | none of them has been released yet... but the sooner you settle
> | on this the better :)
>
> Good point. I guess we need to put that on the 1.6 feature list. (We could
> really do with a libtool bugzilla to manage this kind of thing!!).
>
sources.redhat.com has one, does anyone know who to contact to ask them
if we can use it?
Scott
--
Have you ever, ever felt like this?
Had strange things happen? Are you going round the twist?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
- Re: RFC: 77-gary-diagnose-version-mismatch.patch, Gary V. Vaughan, 2004/02/02
- Re: RFC: 77-gary-diagnose-version-mismatch.patch, Gary V. Vaughan, 2004/02/02
- Re: RFC: 77-gary-diagnose-version-mismatch.patch,
Scott James Remnant <=
- Re: RFC: 77-gary-diagnose-version-mismatch.patch, Gary V. Vaughan, 2004/02/02
- Re: RFC: 77-gary-diagnose-version-mismatch.patch, Tom Tromey, 2004/02/02
- Re: RFC: 77-gary-diagnose-version-mismatch.patch, Gary V. Vaughan, 2004/02/03
- Re: RFC: 77-gary-diagnose-version-mismatch.patch, Scott James Remnant, 2004/02/03
- Re: RFC: 77-gary-diagnose-version-mismatch.patch, Gary V. Vaughan, 2004/02/03
Re: RFC: 77-gary-diagnose-version-mismatch.patch, Gary V. Vaughan, 2004/02/02
Re: RFC: 77-gary-diagnose-version-mismatch.patch, Gary V. Vaughan, 2004/02/02