On Mon, Jan 22, 2001 at 08:08:31PM +0100, Akim Demaille wrote:
: > "Lars" == Lars J Aas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
:
: Lars> On Wed, Jan 17, 2001 at 10:15:49AM +0100, Akim Demaille wrote: :
: Lars> Anyone seeing a show stopper? Let's go for a snapshot today.
:
: Lars> We're soon a week beh
> "Lars" == Lars J Aas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Lars> On Wed, Jan 17, 2001 at 10:15:49AM +0100, Akim Demaille wrote: :
Lars> Anyone seeing a show stopper? Let's go for a snapshot today.
Lars> We're soon a week behind schedule. Hurry up guys! ;-) How
Lars> about this wednesday, making i
On Wed, Jan 17, 2001 at 10:15:49AM +0100, Akim Demaille wrote:
: Anyone seeing a show stopper? Let's go for a snapshot today.
We're soon a week behind schedule. Hurry up guys! ;-)
How about this wednesday, making it an odd week?
Lars J
--
Innovation is one percent inspiration and ninetynin
On Jan 22, 2001, Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alexandre Oliva writes:
>> On Jan 22, 2001, Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > No message, just continue. Or maybe some message, but continue anyway.
>>
>> At the expense of having all execution tests fail for the
"Derek R. Price" wrote:
> Akim Demaille wrote:
>
> > VPATH is just set to srcdir? So then, I'm in favor of Derek's patch
> > which seems finer that the current one, and updating the Autoconf
> > documentation to explain exactly what happens.
>
> Here's an even slightly better version. It will r
Alexandre Oliva writes:
> On Jan 22, 2001, Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > No message, just continue. Or maybe some message, but continue anyway.
>
> At the expense of having all execution tests fail for the wrong
> reason?
The execution tests are going to fail anyway, whether
Akim Demaille wrote:
> So, I think I'm slowly starting to understand this VPATH stuff:
> configure wants to remove it only when useless, right? I.e., when
> VPATH is just set to srcdir? So then, I'm in favor of Derek's patch
> which seems finer that the current one, and updating the Autoconf
>
> "Peter" == Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Peter> Akim Demaille writes: Autoconf now assumes that if you can't
Peter> run a program then you must be cross-compiling, so you should
Peter> use --host.
>> No, it says `It doesn't work', and `if you were doing cross
>> compilation,
On Jan 22, 2001, Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No message, just continue. Or maybe some message, but continue anyway.
At the expense of having all execution tests fail for the wrong
reason?
--
Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC D
Akim Demaille writes:
> Peter> Autoconf now assumes that if you can't run a program then you
> Peter> must be cross-compiling, so you should use --host.
>
> No, it says `It doesn't work', and `if you were doing cross
> compilation, then say it loud and clear'.
>
> What kind of message would you s
> "Alexandre" == Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Alexandre> My reasoning is that, if it can be #included twice without
Alexandre> error, it can't hurt. I can't think of any problem with
Alexandre> it, can you?
Systems usually have more imagination than you and I have :)
Alexand
On Jan 22, 2001, Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> "Lars" == Lars J Aas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Lars> * aclang.m4 (_AC_PROG_CXX_EXIT_DECLARATION): First try no
Lars> declaration, then '#include ', before trying the
Lars> explicit declarations.
> If Alexandre thinks it is OK tha
> "Lars" == Lars J Aas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Lars> * aclang.m4 (_AC_PROG_CXX_EXIT_DECLARATION): First try no
Lars> declaration, then '#include ', before trying the
Lars> explicit declarations.
If Alexandre thinks it is OK that stdlib.h be *always* included in
*all the tests*, then it
On Mon, Jan 22, 2001 at 01:45:13PM +0100, Lars J. Aas wrote:
: 2001-01-22 Lars J. Aas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
:
: * aclang.m4 (_AC_PROG_CXX_EXIT_DECLARATION): First try no declaration,
: then '#include ', before trying the explicit declarations.
+ Suggested by Alexandre Oliva.
(
On Mon, Jan 22, 2001 at 11:08:59AM +0100, Akim Demaille wrote:
: > "Alexandre" == Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
:
: Lars> There's "#pragma once" and an ifndef wrapper in it ASAIR, so
: Lars> that should work fine. Using '' first in the list of
: Lars> ac_declaration's didn't tr
> "akim" == akim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
akim> Thanks. We must be hitting some internal size limitation I
akim> guess. I will apply the patch you suggest.
I'm applying the patch below. Harlan, please, try this Autoconf, or
maybe even the test suite (but I'm quite pessimistic wrt the
> "Kevin" == Kevin Ryde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Kevin> Alas attempts at making such an input have met with miserable
Kevin> failure.
Kevin> Whatever the bug is, it seems highly dependent on the
Kevin> environment. I got to config.status.cutdown below which
Kevin> provokes the segv under
> "Tom" == Tom Tromey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Akim" == Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Akim> It seems to me that Autoconf's job is not to remove unportable
Akim> code written by the user, so it seems wrong to have it remove
Akim> VPATH definitions from Makefiles. Histori
> "Peter" == Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Peter> Autoconf now assumes that if you can't run a program then you
Peter> must be cross-compiling, so you should use --host.
No, it says `It doesn't work', and `if you were doing cross
compilation, then say it loud and clear'.
Wh
> "Alexandre" == Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Lars> There's "#pragma once" and an ifndef wrapper in it ASAIR, so
Lars> that should work fine. Using '' first in the list of
Lars> ac_declaration's didn't trigger though, probably for some other
Lars> reason.
Alexandre> It should
The problem is a conflict between the REQUIRE and the LANG mechanisms.
It is a grave bug (oops, sorry, I meant serious :), and must be fixed.
Basically if you have two macros, AC_F77_1 and AC_F77_2, requiring to
be run with a Fortran context, then with
AC_DEFUN([AC_F77_1],
[AC_LANG_PUSH([Fortran
Antigen for Exchange found EBGILGEB.EXE matching =*.exe file filter.
The file is currently Deleted. The message, "Virus Alert?...", was
sent from Bernard Dautrevaux and was discovered in IMC Queues\Inbound
located at SLAC.
Potentially malicious file types are automatically removed from email.
Hey all,
I just receive (yesterday evening in fact) a mail from the autoconf
mailing list containing just an "EBGILGEB.EXE" attachment... I suspect it to
be a Virus, although I didn't try it :-)
I was quite concerned about the fact that the mailing list accepts
attachments, espe
2000-01-19 Lars J. Aas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* aclang.m4 (_AC_COMPILER_EXEEXT_*): export ac_cv_exeext
+
Please, don't do that.
OK with me, and in the cvs commit queue.
25 matches
Mail list logo
