Re: cvs version of autoconf

2000-02-18 Thread Akim Demaille
> "Gabor" == Gabor Z Papp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Gabor> When I have a new.m4 file, and I want use with autoconf, its Gabor> enough to copy to the autoconf directory? No. look where there are other m4 files, and place it there. Otherwise read the documentation of Automake, look for `acl

Re: How to optionally test for a C++ compiler?

2000-02-18 Thread Akim Demaille
> "Olly" == Olly Betts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Olly> Thoughts? I'm happy to do the work, but I'd rather not spend Olly> time on it and then get told it's not useful. It is certainly going to be useful. Nonetheless, I think we should not hurry. The problem you are addressing is clearly

Re: How to optionally test for a C++ compiler?

2000-02-18 Thread Akim Demaille
> "Olly" == Olly Betts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Olly> I hesitate to criticise the valiant efforts of the maintainers, Olly> but this does appear to be a general problem with autoconf. I Olly> don't feel I'm using autoconf in advanced ways, but I seem to Olly> end up having to use CVS vers

Re: cvs version of autoconf

2000-02-18 Thread Gabor Z. Papp
Akim Demaille wrote: | Gabor> There is an acglib.m4 but no related are defined. | | Sorry, I don't understand. In glib source I have an acglib.m4 file, but no AC_PATH_GLIB defined or used in it, so I think it isn't usable. MC guys didn't answer for my report. BTW, I just compiled libtool. I in

Re: cvs version of autoconf

2000-02-18 Thread Akim Demaille
> "Gabor" == Gabor Z Papp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Gabor> In glib source I have an acglib.m4 file, but no AC_PATH_GLIB Gabor> defined or used in it, so I think it isn't usable. MC guys Gabor> didn't answer for my report. You said AM_PATH_GLIB the first time, but I suppose that's what you

Re: cvs version of autoconf

2000-02-18 Thread Gabor Z. Papp
Akim Demaille wrote: | Gabor> In glib source I have an acglib.m4 file, but no AC_PATH_GLIB | Gabor> defined or used in it, so I think it isn't usable. MC guys | Gabor> didn't answer for my report. | | You said AM_PATH_GLIB the first time, but I suppose that's what you Yes, I misspelled. :( | m

Re: autoconf testsuite endless loop

2000-02-18 Thread Akim Demaille
| On Fri, Feb 18, 2000 at 03:39:59PM +0100, Akim Demaille wrote: | > | > Could you change tests/tools.m4 from | > | > # A script in charge of testing `/bin/sh -n'. | > AT_DATA(syntax.sh, | > [[set -e | > (/bin/sh -n endless.sh) & | > cpid=$! | > sleep 2 && kill $cpid >/dev/null 2>&1 | > ]]) | >

Re: How to optionally test for a C++ compiler?

2000-02-18 Thread Olly Betts
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Akim Demaille writes: >> "Olly" == Olly Betts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >Olly> Thoughts? I'm happy to do the work, but I'd rather not spend >Olly> time on it and then get told it's not useful. > >It is certainly going to be useful. Nonetheless, I think we sh

Re: autoconf extensions

2000-02-18 Thread Olly Betts
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Paul Wolfenbarger wrote: >I have need of extensions to autoconf for a C++ project I am working on. >These will check for C++ capabilities such as rtti, the stl library, etc. >in much the same way the current set checks for features of the C language. There's a w

autoconf extensions

2000-02-18 Thread Paul Wolfenbarger
Gentlewhatevers, I have need of extensions to autoconf for a C++ project I am working on. These will check for C++ capabilities such as rtti, the stl library, etc. in much the same way the current set checks for features of the C language. The question is has anyone already done this type of