Re: Libtool 2.2.6a

[Jeff Squyres]

On Sep 17, 2008, at 3:00 PM, Peter O'Gorman wrote:

> Yeah, it is mostly a repacking of the libtool-2.2.6.tar.* that were
> released the day before. Putting up files with the same name but
> different sums is also bad. It is noted in the release announcement:

I understand, and I saw the version number discrepancy in the release  
announcement (FWIW, I've had those "oops-need-to-rerelease-in-less- 
than-24-hours" kinds of moments as well -- so I feel your pain).  But  
I did not expect the tarball to expand into a directory ending in  
"2.2.6".

Specifically: the tarball has a filename that ends in "2.2.6a".  To  
match the convention used by all the other autoconf/automake/libtool  
tarballs, I expected it to expand into a directory named "2.2.6a" --  
and my scripts reflected that expectation.  I now have a special case  
for LT 2.2.6a in my scripts.  While this is certainly not the end of  
the world, it shouldn't really have been necessary.  My $0.02 would  
have been to either rename it 2.2.8 or change the directory and  
version to report 2.2.6a.

Don't get me wrong; I'm a long-time, happy Libtool user.  This is just  
something that surprised me because it went against prior conventions,  
so I thought I'd mention it on the list.

--
Jeff Squyres
Cisco Systems