Re: New libtool maintainer

[Roumen Petrov]

Ozkan Sezer wrote:
> On 2/8/22, Julien ÉLIE <julien@trigofacile.com> wrote:
> > Hi Alex,
> >
> > > Feel free to reach out if you have pending patches/issues you want to
> > > "bump", ideas for improvements, general advice for a new GNU maintainer
> > > - and above all if you'd like to lend a hand toward getting `libtool' up
> > > and running again.
> > Many thanks for your work on Libtool!
> >
> > I believe a good start would be to integrate suggestions and patches
> > from the issue tracker
> >
> >     https://savannah.gnu.org/patch/?group=libtool
> >
> > and maybe also some patches Debian (and other distributions) have added
> > over the years to the last 2.4.6 release.  For instance:
> >
> >     https://sources.debian.org/patches/libtool/2.4.6-15/

We must be very careful with Debian patches!
Only Debian distributes version (valid for 1.4 and 2*) that cannot pass libtool 
regression tests.
As result is expected Debian to be flooded with defects.

> Some of the outstanding bugs with existing patches :
> https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=38305
> https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=23348
> https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=21137
>             (and its dups at 22895, 31900, and 36762)
> https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=21503
> https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=22373
> https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=46559
>
> Some of the outstanding bugs without any suggested patches:
> https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=45738
> https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=52253
> https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=53479

If those bugs are not Debian specific someone could look at them.

Libtool projects must not care for defects that shows Debian libtool brokenness.


Regards,
Roumen Petrov