Carson Chittom wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-11-19 at 09:45 +0300, Mihamina RKTMB wrote:
>> On 11/19/2013 03:45 AM, Carson Chittom wrote:
>> > After a brief effort, I didn't get it to work.
>> >
>> > [...]
>> > So I again attempted to compile the emacs-24.2 SRPM, but apparently
>> > the version of autoconf (2.63) in CentOS was too low (the emacs SRPM
>> > expected 2.69), which caused the build to fail.
>>
>> My personal opinion is you should change you distribution if you want
>> "bleeding edge" sofwtares. CentOS seems not fit this game.
>
> Emacs 24 is not "bleeding edge." It is a released product. Version
> 24.1 was released June 10, 2012.
I'm coming in late to this, and have missed the beginning... but beg
pardon, but released in what form? From the folks who develop it? CentOS,
like upstream, is usually several years behind the "current" version on
much software, though bug and security fixes are backported.
Where did you get the SRPM? It sounds as though it was *not* from one of
the std. CentOS repos; if repoforge, then note that I have, more than
once, seen dependency conflicts, as has my manager (who was here long
before me), and so we do *not* consider that as a std. repo.
>
> Incidentally, it's not exactly friendly to new users who ask "How do I
> do x?" to reply "Go away; you're not wanted." Trust me to know my own
> needs better than you do.
Much cutting edge isn't here, either. The thing we're big on is
STABILITY!!!. And this wasn't "you're not wanted", it's "I suspect that
what we have as current won't meet your needs".
Perhaps you might want to try fedora (not anywhere I want to go, but as
you say, you know your own needs better than we do).
mark