glibc configury: ac_includes_default

Hi! In glibc, we can't make configure decisions based on the host system's C library, as we must be independent of it -- we're about to build the C library at this time. But, $ac_includes_default (as used via AC_INCLUDES_DEFAULT by default) in several autoconf tests (headers, etc.) contains #incl

Inconsistency w.r.t. defining the same symbol more than once

Hello! This is with Autoconf 2.59. Consider the following: configure.ac #v+ AC_INIT([foo], [1]) AC_DEFINE([FOO], [0]) AC_DEFINE([FOO], [1]) AC_CONFIG_FILES([Makefile]) AC_OUTPUT #v- Makefile.in #v+ DEFS = @DEFS@ #v- #v+ $ autoconf $ ./configure configure: creating ./config.status config.statu

Re: Inconsistency w.r.t. defining the same symbol more than once

Hello! On Mon, Oct 09, 2006 at 01:03:57PM +0200, Stepan Kasal wrote: > On Sun, Oct 08, 2006 at 02:16:00PM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > $ grep FOO config.h > > /* FOO 1 */ > > #define FOO 0 > ... > > The _first_ definition (i.e. `FOO=0') will be used. &g

Re: Inconsistency w.r.t. defining the same symbol more than once

Hello! On Mon, Oct 09, 2006 at 02:51:54PM +0200, Stepan Kasal wrote: > On Mon, Oct 09, 2006 at 07:24:47AM -0400, Thomas Dickey wrote: > > [...], why isn't it documented? > > this is the easier of your questions: > > The behaviour is not part of the documented interface, because we do not want >

``install -C'' / unnecessarily updating time stamps

Hello! Please tell me if that has been discussed before -- I couldn't come up with good search terms to check myself. Automake section. I was thinking about the following: when in a package P1 (using Automake) e.g. C header files are installed via ``make install'', they are installed unconditio

Re: ``install -C'' / unnecessarily updating time stamps

[I added the patch's author, Akim Demaille, to the cc list, as it was not sure if he's still reading the list.] Hello! On Sun, Dec 24, 2006 at 04:21:50PM -0800, Paul Eggert wrote: > Benoit Sigoure <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/automake-patches/2006-10/msg00070

GNU Mach's usage of the Auto* tools (was: [OT] avoid long ac_user_opts line in configure)

[Moved to the and mailing lists.] Hello! On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 12:17:25AM +0100, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > * Thomas Schwinge wrote on Wed, Jan 10, 2007 at 09:40:41PM CET: > > #v+ > > $ ~/tmp/source/gnumach/clean/gnumach-1-branch/configure --help | egrep ^\ \ > > --...\?

Multiple --with-foo possible?

Hello! Is it possible to have the case handled where multiple ``--with-foo'' arguments are given? Currently the last one wins, it seems. What I'd like to support is ``--with-module=this --with-module=another_one ...''. Is this possible? Regards, Thomas signature.asc Description: Digital si

Re: Multiple --with-foo possible?

Hello! On Sat, Apr 05, 2008 at 12:54:39PM +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > * Thomas Schwinge wrote on Sat, Apr 05, 2008 at 11:36:50AM CEST: > > Is it possible to have the case handled where multiple ``--with-foo'' > > arguments are given? Currently the last one wins, it

Re: Multiple --with-foo possible?

Hello! On Sat, Apr 05, 2008 at 02:23:22PM +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > OK. There are a couple of issues you have to deal with then: Ralf, thanks for your help! > Second, you have to actually get at the switches that were used. I > think you can proceed similarly to the algorithm used by _AC

Re: ``install -C'' / unnecessarily updating time stamps

Hello! It's been some time, but still... On Mon, Dec 25, 2006 at 09:23:15PM -0800, Paul Eggert wrote: > Benoit Sigoure <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/automake-patches/2006-10/msg00070.html > > I installed the following to Automake install-sh to implement > "