Re: Re: svn: / pecl/pdo_4d/trunk/config.m4 pecl/pdo_ibm/trunk/config.m4 pecl/pdo_informix/trunk/config.m4 pecl/pdo_user/trunk/config.m4
php/php-src/branches/PHP_5_2/acinclude.m4 php/php-src/branches/PHP_5_2/configure.in php/php-src/branches

From: Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 11:38:44 +0000
Subject: Re: Re: svn: / pecl/pdo_4d/trunk/config.m4 pecl/pdo_ibm/trunk/config.m4 pecl/pdo_informix/trunk/config.m4 pecl/pdo_user/trunk/config.m4
php/php-src/branches/PHP_5_2/acinclude.m4 php/php-src/branches/PHP_5_2/configure.in php/php-src/branches
References: 1 2 3 4 5  Groups: php.internals 
Request: Send a blank email to internals+get-46185@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message
On Wed, 25 Nov 2009, Alexey Zakhlestin wrote: > > On 25.11.2009, at 13:43, Antony Dovgal wrote: > > > On 25.11.2009 13:36, Alexey Zakhlestin wrote: > >> Wouldn't following recommendations printed in warnings help? > > > > Sure, but only for newer autoconf versions. > > Which means we would break autoconf 2.13 if we follow them. > > Is that a problem for trunk, for example? All modern systems have > newer autoconf-versions. And trunk means +1 year from now, at least 2.13 works a whole lot better, so yes, that is a problem. Derick -- http://derickrethans.nl | http://ezcomponents.org | http://xdebug.org twitter: @derickr

« previous php.internals (#46185) next »