Re: Autoconf version discrepancies

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>> The patches ad, ae, and af will cause configure to fail on machines
>> without mktemp. It's not like things get "screwed up" for me, but the
>> point of Autoconf is portability to *all* machines, so FreeBSD-specific
>> changes/optimizations(?) seem misplaced.

> Are there any platforms that do not have mktemp? Hard to imagine.

Not hard at all, considering that mktemp(1) is defined by no standard
according to the references I have handy.

More generally, I have to side with Peter on this: local patches to
Autoconf are a fine example of Missing The Point. The output script
has to run everywhere, not only on your own platform.

Also, we not long ago went through the exercise of making sure that all
committers were standardized on the same version of Autoconf, ie, 2.13.
Now it emerges that hub.org is running a NON STANDARD version of
Autoconf: 2.13 + unspecified BSD-originated hacks. So the output is
likely to change depending on who committed last and where they did it
from.

This will not do. Please fix hub's copy of Autoconf.

regards, tom lane