On 02 Dec 2023 18:33, Jacob Bachmeyer wrote: > Zack Weinberg wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 2, 2023, at 6:37 PM, Karl Berry wrote: > >> The best way to check if high-resolution > >> timestamps are available to autom4te is to have perl load > >> Autom4te::FileUtils and check if that also loaded Time::HiRes. > >> > >> The problem with that turned out to be that Time::HiRes got loaded from > >> other system modules, resulting in the test thinking that autom4te used > >> it when that wasn't actually the case. That's what happened in practice > >> with your patch. > > > > Would it help if we added a command line option to autom4te that made it > > report whether it thought it could use high resolution timestamps? Versions > > of autom4te that didn't recognize this option should be conservatively > > assumed not to support them. > > Why not just add that information to the --version message? Add a > "(HiRes)" tag somewhere if Time::HiRes is available? All versions that > know to check if Time::HiRes is loaded will also know how to use it, > unlike the earlier test.
parsing out the exact version from --version is already a pita. trying it freeform text that we also want tools to do substring searching on sounds extremely fragile and the opposite of future-proof. libtool at least has a --config option that dumps shell-link syntax. -mike
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
