Re: [avr-libc-dev] reconf

[E. Weddington]

Joerg Wunsch wrote:

> As E. Weddington wrote:
>
>  
>
> > Do you think the version checking in the reconf script is strictly
> > necessary?
> >    
>
> No idea.
>
> If all works well with newer versions, I don't care.
>
>  
Thanks.

> I'd first like to deal with bug #4101 though.
>
>  
Makes sense. I'm also going to have to go through the IO headers with a 
comb now and fix up the problems I created (a la bug #11486). This might 
mean a 1.2.1 release. Sorry for the hassle.

> About the multilib thingy, remember there's a separate branch in CVS
> where Ted started to experiment.
>
>  
I do remember, but according to the note in the TODO:
<http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/avr-libc-dev/2003-09/msg00030.html>
I feel that the branch was doing a bit too much by combining the 
lib-per-device feature with upgrading to new versions of the autotools.

My goal is to see what it would take to *just* get the autotool upgrade 
working, and doing the lib/device thing later.