From dadfd94652601011351c18ae020c5b473fc8e0a3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jens Vollinga Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2011 15:10:50 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Preparing for release 1.6.2. --- NEWS | 6 ++++++ configure.ac | 8 ++++---- 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/NEWS b/NEWS index 5afeae8e..bd495b3f 100644 --- a/NEWS +++ b/NEWS @@ -1,5 +1,11 @@ This file records noteworthy changes. +1.6.2 (6 November 2011) +* Fixed the parser to read GiNaC::lst again. +* Fixed a compile warning (relevant to openSUSE build). +* Fixed a bug concerning the subsitutions in indexed expressions + (subs_options::no_index_renaming was ignored). + 1.6.1 (18 July 2011) * Fixed several internal assertions for the debug version of GiNaC. * More verbose report of (auto-)configuration problems. diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac index ad20b407..d5b3af59 100644 --- a/configure.ac +++ b/configure.ac @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ dnl Process this file with autoconf to produce a configure script. dnl GiNaC version number m4_define([ginac_major_version], [1]) m4_define([ginac_minor_version], [6]) -m4_define([ginac_micro_version], [1]) +m4_define([ginac_micro_version], [2]) m4_define([ginac_version], [ginac_major_version.ginac_minor_version.ginac_micro_version]) m4_define([ginac_release], [ginac_major_version.ginac_minor_version]) @@ -24,9 +24,9 @@ dnl systems, the numbering is consecutive. It only guarantees that it is dnl increasing. This doesn't matter, though: there is not incurred cost dnl for numbers that are omitted, except for shrinking the available space dnl of leftover numbers. Not something we need to worry about yet. ;-) -m4_define([ginac_lt_current], [2]) -m4_define([ginac_lt_revision], [1]) -m4_define([ginac_lt_age], [0]) +m4_define([ginac_lt_current], [3]) +m4_define([ginac_lt_revision], [0]) +m4_define([ginac_lt_age], [1]) AC_INIT([GiNaC], ginac_version, [ginac-list@ginac.de], [ginac], [http://www.ginac.de/]) AC_PREREQ(2.59) -- 2.44.0