From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Pirotte Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: guile-lib - devel branch - patch 4 of 11 Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2016 21:05:20 -0300 Message-ID: <20160724210520.2da514b9@capac> References: <20160715224305.432410c3@capac> <83wpkm5c1u.fsf@gnu.org> <20160716173402.014d9a12@capac> <83vb053s9r.fsf@gnu.org> <20160717172635.40bcfe87@capac> <83y44z1xet.fsf@gnu.org> <20160719205344.255d1f88@capac> <83twfkz7mj.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; boundary="Sig_/180eZyWFhiA3LpFRQRzMjTO"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1469405175 9940 80.91.229.3 (25 Jul 2016 00:06:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2016 00:06:15 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jul 25 02:06:06 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1bRTPI-0003tD-M8 for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 25 Jul 2016 02:06:04 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57949 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bRTPH-0003om-T7 for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 24 Jul 2016 20:06:03 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47736) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bRTOv-0003og-SX for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 24 Jul 2016 20:05:43 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bRTOu-00050m-E3 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 24 Jul 2016 20:05:41 -0400 Original-Received: from maximusconfessor.all2all.org ([79.99.200.102]:53396) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bRTOo-0004zs-Po; Sun, 24 Jul 2016 20:05:35 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost (unknown [192.168.0.2]) by maximusconfessor.all2all.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6356A04C0E1; Mon, 25 Jul 2016 02:05:32 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from maximusconfessor.all2all.org ([192.168.0.1]) by localhost (maximusconfessor.all2all.org [192.168.0.2]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6E3TKW1aUuvm; Mon, 25 Jul 2016 02:05:27 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from capac (unknown [179.210.32.222]) by maximusconfessor.all2all.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C0078A04C0DE; Mon, 25 Jul 2016 02:05:26 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <83twfkz7mj.fsf@gnu.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.13.2 (GTK+ 2.24.30; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 79.99.200.102 X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "guile-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:18626 Archived-At: --Sig_/180eZyWFhiA3LpFRQRzMjTO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello Eli, > > Don't you understand? How could I possibly answer that quiz, since it's= been 4 > > years I use 2.69? You can't tell for sure just because there has been no > > complain: you can only tell for sure if someone you 'trust' check with = what ever > > version you'd like to use. =20 > Problems in past versions of development tools are described in the > documentation, and if that's not enough, the maintainers of the tools > can be asked about them. There should be no need to learn about that > from personal experience alone. I totally disagree with your last sentence, as a consequence of both what I= 've been teached and what my experience 'told' me. So, if you have a well isolated environment using an earlier version of autoconf and automake 1.14, I'll tr= ust you. Besides, should I agree with you, but I don't, I still have absolutely no t= ime and no interest to read about a 5y doc and ask maintainers quiz about 5y old versi= on of these tools. > > Besides, 'users' who locally manually install and compile GDB probably = know a lot > > more then I on the subject :) =20 > I don't think the fact that I build my own GDB means my time is cheap > and should be disregarded. I never implied that, this is a very unfair statement: you are the one who = ask me to spend my time to read and talk to maintainers about a more then 4y tool and= doc. At the very most, all you have to do is to locally edit the guile-lib confi= gure.ac and change AC_PREREQ(2.69) to what ever version you use and 'pass': that d= oes take any time. > AC_PREREQ(2.69) >=20 > even though an older version would do, is IMO not a good idea. This has nothing to do with an 'idea', it's about what we can guarantee: as= I said above, it's not ok for me to 'just' read, and if you can test 'make distche= ck' and tells me it's ok, using an earlier version of autoconf and automake 1.14, I= 'll trust you. > And if you still disagree, let's leave it at that. I'm not speaking > for the Guile project, so my opinion can be easily overridden. I don't speak in the name of Guile either, I am contributor. Note that this= =20 is Guile-Lib, not Guile (not that it would change my position wrt this, but= ...). Thanks, David --Sig_/180eZyWFhiA3LpFRQRzMjTO Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJXlVfAAAoJEPN0/ZOjBXrXwmAH/3IVfjKf9vmpPIggdyZ6V3sr byhzCQHWBVhLwIgqkCDl4NJxRuuK336hFbN/O4h+Kk53dfcpRVTJwU5dWXLYgA4g K96aqt7OAXQDNbODjskEFy+ATJ+Tg1t0icoNN2X2W4h9fdXQfkx27diLtkhKsIrm 2dXSP9ysrHXIRf64uDJP8LeMQaJngpniDTzzNaCsZGTJ8CplXnrElhMmWmIusDZs Yx0TEzYfNpogamb7ijEFhzE01Att8XgvEMlKVTRF8dj2moZeAPP84zBEdP9Zscxe J/6gRfFzqNbE9WtJAP/PT6rB2aWEytDFJPle72ykcWSIW/bHP3eZeSd2ofQUXI0= =Qrvv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/180eZyWFhiA3LpFRQRzMjTO--