Hi Eric, You requested a rapid review:
Eric Blake wrote: > + AC_SEARCH_LIBS([forkpty], [util libutil], > + [if test "$ac_cv_search_forkpty" != "none required"; then > + PTY_LIB="$ac_cv_search_forkpty" > + fi]) The second argument [util libutil] can be simplified to [util], no? Searching for liblibutil sounds useless. > diff --git a/modules/forkpty b/modules/forkpty > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000..52dbc49 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/modules/forkpty > @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@ > +Description: > +Provide the forkpty() function. > + > +Files: > +m4/forkpty.m4 > + > +Depends-on: > +openpty > +pty > ... > diff --git a/modules/openpty b/modules/openpty > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000..2a019a5 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/modules/openpty > @@ -0,0 +1,26 @@ > +Description: > +Provide the openpty() function. > + > +Files: > +m4/forkpty.m4 > + > +Depends-on: > +pty I don't understand two things here: - Why does 'forkpty' depend on 'openpty'? - Since forkpty.m4 is used for both 'forkpty' and 'openpty', it is asymetric and a bit misleading to call it 'forkpty.m4'. Why not call it 'pty.m4'? Bruno