Should we require autoconf 2.69?

[H.J. Lu]

On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 1:34 PM, Roland McGrath <roland@hack.frob.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Roland McGrath <roland@hack.frob.com> wrote:
>> > If you make sure the GLIBC_PROVIDES magic in aclocal.m4 is still right,
>> > then it's fine with me.
>>
>> What should I look for?  I didn't get any error messages with autoconf 2.69.
>
> Basically you should regenerate all the sysdeps/.../configure files and
> eyeball the diffs for sanity.  If any of them inflates a lot or anything
> else bizarre-looking, then we have a problem.

I regenerated all configure files with autoconf 2.69.  Here is the
diff.  It looks good to me.  OK to install?

Thanks.


-- 
H.J.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: autoconf.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 33101 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://sourceware.org/pipermail/libc-alpha/attachments/20140918/26e98445/attachment.bin>