Re: autoconf version for back branches?

Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I do
>> PATH=/usr/local/autoconf-2.53/bin:$PATH autoconf
>> when I need to update back-branch configure scripts.

> Ah! Thanks! What had failed for me was just running with
> /path/to/old/autoconf - this one works however. Strange that a config
> package can't work out where its own installed files are.

I see several different scripts in /usr/local/autoconf-2.53/bin, so
likely the problem is that 'autoconf' just invokes the others as
'scriptname' and doesn't force an absolute path. I'm too lazy to check
if this is still true in latest autoconf, but if so the FSF guys might
accept a bug report. (Or they may have some weird reason why it's a
feature not a bug. But in any case I'd be surprised if they risk making
such a change in obsolete autoconf versions.)

regards, tom lane