[RFC] X.Org minimum requirements for Autotools policy review

Gaetan Nadon memsize at videotron.ca
Wed Oct 30 02:55:55 CET 2013

On 13-10-29 05:52 PM, Peter Hutterer wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 09:16:53AM -0400, Gaetan Nadon wrote:
>> On 13-10-24 02:17 PM, Gaetan Nadon wrote:
>>> Recommendations
>>>  1. We should prereq libtool 2.2 as a minimum (available since 2008).
>>>  2. We should prereq autoconf 2.62 as a minimum (available since
>>>     2008). Keeps us in the same time period and is required by
>>>     automake 1.11.
>>>  3. We should prereq automake 1.11 (available since 2009). Keeps us in
>>>     the same time period. 
>>>     If the policy is changed, the wiki will be updated.
>> Let's get started with libtool. No one is objecting to libtool 2.2. It's
>> been in use for several years.
>> This will allow fixing some warnings and prevent some errors like having
>> both AC_PROG_LIBTOOL and LT_INIT statements. It will prevent developers
>> from wasting time tripping on obsolete code.
>> The X.Org Modular Tree Developer's Guide:
>>     http://www.x.org/wiki/ModularDevelopersGuide/#index2h3
> while I see this link: it would be a good idea to rename this page to a
> generic "how to build". These days, "modular tree" isn't as obvious anymore
> since we haven't had the monolithic tree for 7-or-so years.

There was a hint for the new title in the introduction. Seemed like a
perfect fit.


    This guide is for developers who wish to *build the X Window System
    from source*. If your area of interest is limited to a single
    package, like a driver or an application, check with your O/S first
    for development facilities.

> Cheers,
>    Peter

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel/attachments/20131029/2d09f756/attachment.html>

More information about the xorg-devel mailing list