When running _autosetup on FC11, I get the following. If anyone knows how to get rid of them, let me know. -- David
configure.ac:308: warning: AC_CACHE_VAL(lt_prog_compiler_pic_works, ...): suspicious cache-id, must contain _cv_ to be cached m4/libtool.m4:568: AC_LIBTOOL_COMPILER_OPTION is expanded from... m4/libtool.m4:4559: AC_LIBTOOL_PROG_COMPILER_PIC is expanded from... configure.ac:308: warning: AC_CACHE_VAL(lt_prog_compiler_pic_works_CXX, ...): suspicious cache-id, must contain _cv_ to be cached m4/libtool.m4:2604: _LT_AC_LANG_CXX_CONFIG is expanded from... m4/libtool.m4:2603: AC_LIBTOOL_LANG_CXX_CONFIG is expanded from... m4/libtool.m4:1646: _LT_AC_TAGCONFIG is expanded from... configure.ac:308: warning: AC_CACHE_VAL(lt_prog_compiler_pic_works_F77, ...): suspicious cache-id, must contain _cv_ to be cached m4/libtool.m4:3673: _LT_AC_LANG_F77_CONFIG is expanded from... m4/libtool.m4:3672: AC_LIBTOOL_LANG_F77_CONFIG is expanded from... configure.ac:308: warning: AC_CACHE_VAL(lt_prog_compiler_pic_works_GCJ, ...): suspicious cache-id, must contain _cv_ to be cached m4/libtool.m4:3773: _LT_AC_LANG_GCJ_CONFIG is expanded from... m4/libtool.m4:3772: AC_LIBTOOL_LANG_GCJ_CONFIG is expanded from... James Wanless wrote: > I don't know if it's related. [It could well just be my so-far inability > to set up a correct Fedora10 machine for running the server on... I'm > still experimenting... :)] > But, I experienced some (actually several) odd-looking warning messages > when running the _autosetup stage on F10. They definitely weren't there > for the same code under F8, and AFAIK, the code all seemed to compile > and even run fine subsequently (F10 as well) despite these. I'm afraid I > didn't log them, but they were all of the order "Suspicious xyz in abc" > (IIRC). If it's of concern (or not easily explained by my ineptitude - > any help very gratefully rec'd - thx), I can probably reproduce them > here in exact detail if nec. This seemed to be for all/many recent > changesets, including, I believe, even the server_stable of several > months ago (I was curious, so checked! :). As I say they were doubly > surprising (to me at least) both because the warnings were under the > _later_ version of Fedora, and the use of the word 'Suspicious' several > times, which I don't think I for one, have seen before. > Anyway seemed I ought to flag it in response to this message (below), > just-in-case... > J > > On 17 Sep 2009, at 19:10, David Anderson wrote: > >> I checked in changes that add options to all server programs: >> --help prints the usage >> --version prints the name of the repository and the version# >> from which the program was built. >> This will require a _autosetup/configure/make at the top level. >> >> BTW, I've noticed a couple of problems in the build system: >> >> - "make" at the top level rebuilds everything in sched/, >> even if it's up to date. >> >> - dependencies across directories are ignored in some cases. >> For example, if you make everything, >> then go to tools/ and touch backend_lib.cpp, >> make doesn't rebuild anything. >> >> If any autoconf/automake experts can figure this out, let me know. >> >> -- David >> _______________________________________________ >> boinc_dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev >> To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and >> (near bottom of page) enter your email address. > > _______________________________________________ boinc_dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and (near bottom of page) enter your email address.
