On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 07:28:44AM +0200, Anton Khirnov wrote: > Quoting Diego Biurrun (2016-09-29 18:19:13) > > On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 02:12:53PM +0200, Anton Khirnov wrote: > > > Quoting Diego Biurrun (2016-09-08 12:34:14) > > > > On Wed, Sep 07, 2016 at 02:59:38PM +0200, Anton Khirnov wrote: > > > > > --- a/configure > > > > > +++ b/configure > > > > > @@ -4533,6 +4555,12 @@ check_header > > > > > VideoDecodeAcceleration/VDADecoder.h > > > > > > > > > > +# it seems there are versions of clang in some distros that try to > > > > > use the > > > > > +# gcc headers, which explodes for stdatomic > > > > > +# so we also check that atomics actually work here > > > > > +check_header stdatomic.h && > > > > > + check_code cc "stdatomic.h" "atomic_int foo; atomic_store(&foo, > > > > > 0)" || disable stdatomic_h > > > > > > > > check_func_headers() > > > > > > Does not do what I want here. > > > > You need to know not only that the header is present, but that the > > functions it exposes are usable. So just check for a function, here in > > configure, and in the C code. It's what we do in other such cases. > > Those things are not really proper functions, they will be typically > compiler builtins.
But you can check for them as if they were functions, can you not? Diego _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
