[syslog-ng] Newer libtool and autoconf versions?

[Balazs Scheidler]

On Thu, 2010-12-09 at 20:45 +0100, Balazs Scheidler wrote: 
> Hi,
> 
> On Thu, 2010-12-09 at 15:12 +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Right now, the current 3.2.1 sources can't be build on Cygwin.  Apart
> > from two minor problems which are fixed in git (bugzilla items 101 and
> > 102) and a refresh of the files in contrib/cygwin-packaging (bugzilla
> > entry 103), there's a somewhat more troubeling problem.
> > 
> > The source tarballs contain libtool/autoconf-generated files which have
> > been created with older versions of these tools, namely libtool 2.2.6b
> > and autoconf 2.65.
> > 
> > In order to get a working libtool *.la dependency mechanism on Cygwin,
> > these files have to be created with pretty new versions of
> > libtool/autoconf, right now at least libtool 2.4 and autoconf 2.67
> > (automake is not affected).  Otherwise, with the old versions, building
> > the shared libs fails due to a libtool bug.
> > 
> > While I can rectify this situation locally by running autoreconf,
> > it would be nice if building syslog-ng from a tarball would work
> > out of the box on Cygwin, just as on other systems.
> > 
> > So, here's my question:  Is it possible to generate subsequent source
> > tarballs using these newer versions of libtool and autoconf?
> > 
> 
> Well, it should be. Those files are generated on  my development laptop,
> currently with Ubuntu lucid.
> 
> maverick has autoconf 2.67, but still libtool 2.2.6b
> 
> So it'll not be solved even if I upgrade to the next distro release.
> 
> Any ideas why Ubuntu uses such an old libtool?

I've checked around, and as it seems the newest libtool is in Debian
experimental (2.2.10). Even the latest Fedora is carrying 2.2.6b

So for now, I can only promise to migrate to autoconf 2.67, but I'm
reluctant to upgrade to libtool 2.4, so the autoreconf stuff will be
needed for a little while.

Hopefully natty will carry newer stuff.

-- 
Bazsi