Patch attached to update wording for m4/include_next.m4 to reveal recent
IBM PTF's that fix the #include_next bug in IBM C 9.0/10.1.

-- 
albert chin (ch...@thewrittenword.com)
>From 9095347bf98b43fce0268d72bef47e74bca1eec1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Albert Chin-A-Young <ch...@thewrittenword.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 14:04:05 -0600
Subject: [PATCH] Include PTF's that fix #include_next bug on IBM C 9.0/10.1.

* m4/include_next.m4: Update wording about IBM C 9.0/10.1 bug now
that PTF's are available from IBM to fix the issue.
---
 m4/include_next.m4 |   18 ++++++++++--------
 1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/m4/include_next.m4 b/m4/include_next.m4
index 062753c..5ee1320 100644
--- a/m4/include_next.m4
+++ b/m4/include_next.m4
@@ -32,14 +32,16 @@ AC_DEFUN([gl_INCLUDE_NEXT],
     [gl_cv_have_include_next],
     [rm -rf conftestd1a conftestd1b conftestd2
      mkdir conftestd1a conftestd1b conftestd2
-     dnl The include of <stdio.h> is because IBM C 9.0 on AIX 6.1 supports
-     dnl include_next when used as first preprocessor directive in a file,
-     dnl but not when preceded by another include directive. Additionally,
-     dnl with this same compiler, include_next is a no-op when used in a
-     dnl header file that was included by specifying its absolute file name.
-     dnl Despite these two bugs, include_next is used in the compiler's
-     dnl <math.h>. By virtue of the second bug, we need to use include_next
-     dnl as well in this case.
+     dnl The include of <stdio.h> is because IBM C 9.0 and 10.1
+     dnl (without Jan 2009 PTF, Feb 2009 PTF, respectively) supports
+     dnl include_next when used as first preprocessor directive in a
+     dnl file, but not when preceded by another include directive.
+     dnl Additionally, with this same compiler, include_next is a
+     dnl no-op when used in a header file that was included by
+     dnl specifying its absolute file name. Despite these two bugs,
+     dnl include_next is used in the compiler's <math.h>. By virtue of
+     dnl the second bug, we need to use include_next as well in this
+     dnl case.
      cat <<EOF > conftestd1a/conftest.h
 #define DEFINED_IN_CONFTESTD1
 #include_next <conftest.h>
-- 
1.5.4.3

Reply via email to