"Alexandre" == Alexandre Oliva [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Alexandre On Jul 11, 2000, Akim Demaille [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't think we need to: test -f itself will do the right thing,
Alexandre Nope. Think of /foo, when /foo doesn't exist, but
Alexandre $srcdir/foo does.
Ahh, of
Akim Demaille wrote:
| Thanks.
| So, is next redaction (for autoconf 1.3) is good ?
*A*utoconf *2.50* :)
no, *this* is for 1.3; for 2.50 will be released after releasing
autoconf snapshot ;)
...
Ooops,. thanks again.
So, finally:
# RSSH_CHECK_SUNPROC_C([ACTION-IF-YES],
On Wed, 12 Jul 2000, Lars J. Aas wrote:
I've just upgraded our projects to CVS Autoconf and CVS Automake.
It works great on Unix, but on Cygwin, with the VC++ 6.0 compiler, it
stops on the "C++ compiler working" test, because it doesn't understand
that "conftest.cc" is a .cpp file so it
On Wed, Jul 12, 2000 at 02:54:28AM -0700, Mo DeJong wrote:
: I ran into a problem like the one you describe. It seems
: that the CVS version of autoconf does not work with
: VC++ at all.
This is *bad* news for me, but probably not for Autoconf development,
as I'll have to work on fixing this...
[a-z] gets expanded by the shell:
--- autoconf.sh 2000/07/10 10:23:09 1.76
+++ autoconf.sh 2000/07/12 10:31:31
@@ -223,7 +223,7 @@
# 2. $WARNINGS, $3 command line options, in that order.
# Set them in the order expected by the M4 macros: the converse.
_ac_warnings=
-for warning in
On Wed, Jul 12, 2000 at 12:29:36PM +0200, Johan Danielsson wrote:
: [a-z] gets expanded by the shell:
:
: --- autoconf.sh 2000/07/10 10:23:09 1.76
: +++ autoconf.sh 2000/07/12 10:31:31
: @@ -223,7 +223,7 @@
: # 2. $WARNINGS, $3 command line options, in that order.
: # Set them
"Lars J. Aas" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why use the braces at all? Are they really necessary? tr A-Z a-z has
always worked for me, and that format won't be expanded by the shell.
That's probably better.
/Johan
Functions like accept are known to have THREE different prototypes:
int accept (int, struct sockaddr *, socklen_t *); /* Linux, Unix98 */
int accept (int, struct sockaddr *, size_t *); /* Solaris 2.6 */
int accept (int, struct sockaddr *, int *); /* DEC OSF 4.0e */
I think autoconf should have
Martin Buchholz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Functions like accept are known to have THREE different prototypes:
int accept (int, struct sockaddr *, socklen_t *); /* Linux, Unix98 */
int accept (int, struct sockaddr *, size_t *); /* Solaris 2.6 */
int accept (int, struct sockaddr *, int *); /*
I have come across one compiler that returns an exit status of 0
if compile errors occur :-{
Thus, AC_COMPILE_IFELSE can't be used to test this compiler's features.
Suggestions?
--
Martin Wilck [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Institute for Tropospheric Research, Permoserstr. 15, D-04318 Leipzig, Germany
I wrote:
I have come across one compiler that returns an exit status of 0
if compile errors occur :-{
Thus, AC_COMPILE_IFELSE can't be used to test this compiler's features.
Suggestions?
A possible workaround is using AC_LINK_IFELSE instead, since that tests
whether an output file was
| [a-z] gets expanded by the shell:
Thanks! Applied.
Alexandre Oliva writes:
What about systems that don't have a `cc' but only a `gcc' or whatever
else?
The user would have to set CC_FOR_BUILD. But see below:
In the future, it may be extended to look for gcc if it can't find
cc.
But that would break things for a lot of people right
Martin Wilck writes:
Another point though (practical experience): The SGI, Sun, AIX machines
at our site often have poorly administered GNU software installed that
is outdated or sometimes even doesn't work at all, whereas the
vendor software is updated on a regular basis. This may result in
On Wed, 12 Jul 2000, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Alexandre Oliva writes:
What about systems that don't have a `cc' but only a `gcc' or whatever
else?
The user would have to set CC_FOR_BUILD. But see below:
In the future, it may be extended to look for gcc if it can't find
cc.
Lars J. Aas writes:
: -for warning in `IFS=,; echo syntax,$WARNINGS,$warnings | tr [A-Z] [a-z]`
: +for warning in `IFS=,; echo syntax,$WARNINGS,$warnings | tr '[A-Z]' '[a-z]'`
Why use the braces at all? Are they really necessary? tr A-Z a-z has
always worked for me, and that format won't
I am getting this strange error from autoheader.
% autoheader
autoheader: No template for symbol `PATH_SEPARATOR'
The code that defines this var looks like:
AC_DEFINE(PATH_SEPARATOR, ';')
Whats up with that?
If I use the old version of autoheader, it given
me some other error.
Symbol
"lb" == lars brinkhoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
lb For comparision, this is what I use in an application of mine. I
lb haven't heard any complaints from Solaris users, but I guess they have
lb just ignored any compilations warnings.
I don't include sys/types.h. The standard says I shouldn't
I've been watching these discussions with interest, as INN uses both of
those functions and I've been trying to figure out if I need to worry
about these macros. One thing that I'm mostly missing, though, is what
benefits a portable program gains from either of these, particularly from
accept.
Autoconf 2.13 can't distinguish between --version and --verbose options.
The latter is apparently no longer a valid option, which is fine, but
then an attempt to use it should result in a usage message. Instead,
it is mistaken for the "--version" option.
This transcript shows all:
$
20 matches
Mail list logo
