On Sun, Aug 27, 2000 at 01:31:43PM -0700, W. Reilly Cooley, Esq. wrote:
I'm running into various dependecies which are causing me much grief.
I updated several GNU packages in my source tree to the versions on alpha,
because I couldn't get them to build on the base system I'm working on
On Aug 27, 2000, Thomas Dickey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
the alpha isn't really compatible with older versions of autoconf.
But it's supposed to be. We'd appreciate any bug reports exposing
incompatibilities.
--
Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat
So the only question is, should we change the default for --sysconfdir?
Only if we also specify that packages shouldn't install anything in
sysconfdir with `make install', only with `install-sysconf'.
Why do you think `make install' should not install them in /etc?
On Aug 29, 2000, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So the only question is, should we change the default for --sysconfdir?
Only if we also specify that packages shouldn't install anything in
sysconfdir with `make install', only with `install-sysconf'.
Why do you think `make
On 29 Aug 2000, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Aug 29, 2000, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So the only question is, should we change the default for --sysconfdir?
Only if we also specify that packages shouldn't install anything in
sysconfdir with `make install', only with
On Tue, 29 Aug 2000, Earnie Boyd wrote:
But is egrep portable? Is the grep in question here GNU grep? AFAIK '^ *+' is
a regular expression and not an extended regular expression.
that's my impression (from reading the description yesterday).
--
T.E.Dickey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Aug 29, 2000, "Thomas E. Dickey" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 29 Aug 2000, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Aug 29, 2000, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So the only question is, should we change the default for --sysconfdir?
Only if we also specify that packages shouldn't
On Aug 29, 2000, Earnie Boyd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
AFAIK '^ *+' is a regular expression and not an extended regular
expression.
`+' after `*' isn't portable, IIRC. In fact, I don't understand what
we're trying to accomplish with that construct. It makes no sense at
all to me.
--
Hello, Earnie!
On Tue, 29 Aug 2000, Earnie Boyd wrote:
But is egrep portable? Is the grep in question here GNU grep? AFAIK '^ *+' is
a regular expression and not an extended regular expression.
egrep is portable. It is used by autoconf several times without checking
its existance.
I tried
On Aug 29, 2000, "Thomas E. Dickey" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 29 Aug 2000, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Aug 29, 2000, Earnie Boyd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
AFAIK '^ *+' is a regular expression and not an extended regular
expression.
`+' after `*' isn't portable, IIRC. In fact, I don't
On Aug 29, 2000, Pavel Roskin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
# Capture the stderr of cpp. eval is necessary to expand ac_cpp. We
# used to copy stderr to stdout and capture it in a variable, but that
# breaks under sh -x, which writes compile commands starting with ` +'
# to stderr in eval and
Hello!
`+' after `*' isn't portable, IIRC. In fact, I don't understand what
we're trying to accomplish with that construct. It makes no sense at
all to me.
If it's not portable let's use '^ *[+]' to be on the safe side. Both grep
and egrep 2.4.2 interpret is in the way it was intended -
On Aug 29, 2000, Pavel Roskin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The only shell I found that outputs pluses to conftest.out (not only to
config.log) is zsh
Isn't it a coincidence that that's the shell Akim uses? :-)
+ * acgeneral.m4 (AC_TRY_CPP): Quote literal plus by square
+ brackets.
Ok
%% Alexandre Oliva [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
ao On Aug 29, 2000, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So the only question is, should we change the default for --sysconfdir?
Only if we also specify that packages shouldn't install anything in
sysconfdir with `make install', only
--- Lars Hecking [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alexandre Oliva writes:
On Aug 29, 2000, Earnie Boyd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
AFAIK '^ *+' is a regular expression and not an extended regular
expression.
`+' after `*' isn't portable, IIRC. In fact, I don't understand what
we're
On 29 Aug 2000, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
The `*' is the metacharacter: `+' is literal.
`+' isn't a portable literal. Some implementations seem to use it as
a meta-character with the usual meaning, but without support for it
after `*'.
unless I missed a response, so far all that's been
Hello, Thomas!
`+' isn't a portable literal. Some implementations seem to use it as
a meta-character with the usual meaning, but without support for it
after `*'.
This was about grep, not egrep. GNU grep 2.4.2 (without -E) behaves
correctly, but the point was that some other
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 10:15:13 -0400 (EDT)
From: Pavel Roskin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
grep-2.4.2 is sufficient to reproduce the problem. No need to upgrade libc
- glibc-2.1.1 is fine.
$ grep --version
grep (GNU grep) 2.4.2
[Copyright etc skipped]
$ echo foo infile
$ grep
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 13:27:10 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Thomas E. Dickey" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
unless I missed a response, so far all that's been demonstrated is that a
newer version of GNU grep doesn't behave the same as other versions of
grep.
I don't even see where that has been
On Tue, 29 Aug 2000, Pavel Roskin wrote:
Hello, Thomas!
`+' isn't a portable literal. Some implementations seem to use it as
a meta-character with the usual meaning, but without support for it
after `*'.
This was about grep, not egrep. GNU grep 2.4.2 (without -E) behaves
Hello!
$ grep -vE '^ *+' infile
$
That behavior is correct for GNU grep, but it is an extension to POSIX.2.
POSIX.2 does not specify the behavior for + after * in an extended
regular expression (i.e. the type of regular expression used by grep
-E). So a portable script should
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 14:20:12 -0400 (EDT)
From: Pavel Roskin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I haven't checked the older versions, but this behaviour of GNU grep is
weird (it may or may not be a bug, dependent on the standard):
$ echo foo |./grep -E ' *+'
foo
It is not a bug. GNU grep
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 03:28:06PM -0700, Paul Eggert wrote:
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 14:20:12 -0400 (EDT)
From: Pavel Roskin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I haven't checked the older versions, but this behaviour of GNU grep is
weird (it may or may not be a bug, dependent on the standard):
Is subversions OK? I went to "cvs update" my autoconf repository and
couldn't access it.
H
The docs for AC_LIBOBJ say (in part):
Technically, it adds 'FUNCTION.$ac_objext' to ...
If this is true, it may still be a bug. Perhaps it should add:
'FUNCTION$U.$ac_objext'
because some folks will be using the ansi2knr stuff.
H
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 19:07:03 -0400
From: Thomas Dickey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It is not a bug. GNU grep extends the semantics of regular
expressions so that 'x*+' is equivalent to '(x*)+'. POSIX does not
I wouldn't call it an extension, since it breaks some existing scripts
26 matches
Mail list logo
