Hi People,
The Autoconf CVS repository has been moved from sourceware.cygnus.com,
run by Jason Molenda, Tom Tromey and others, to subversions.gnu.org,
run by Gordon Matzigkeit (the original author of Libtool), Jeff
Bailey, and others.
The Autoconf gang, no matter how recursive it may sound, wou
> "Mark" == Mark E <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Mark> After looking at what Autoconf actually generates, instead of
Mark> the raw source which is a challenge to understand, perhaps
Mark> you're right and the absolute case should be '/* | ?:[/\\]*'. In
Mark> the generated configure script, I se
> "Earnie" == Earnie Boyd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Earnie> I have a local patch for this. I create a variable named
Earnie> path_separator, set a default of ":" and set
Earnie> IFS=${path_separator}. Then use the --path-separator switch
Earnie> to control it's value.
I'm interested in s
> It make sense to me. What are the conditions to see a \ instead of a
> /?
DOS and Windows, once you get past command.com, accept both
slashes and backslashes. So filenames like 'c:/djgpp/gnu/autoconf-2.13'
are just as valid as 'c:\djgpp\gnu\autoconf-2.13'. Which is why
AC_PATH_PROG should n
> AC_PATH_PROG should now use the pattern '?:[/\\]' in the generated
Err, make that:
?:[/\\]*
Hello, Akim!
> cvs -d :pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/cvs checkout autoconf
It may be a good idea to mention autoconf in CVSROOT/modules so that
"cvs checkout -c" would give the full selection of available modules.
Pavel Roskin
On Sat, 19 Feb 2000, Olly Betts wrote:
> @@ -2420,16 +2411,13 @@
> [if test "$GCC" = yes; then
>ac_cv_c_long_double=yes
> else
> -AC_TRY_RUN(
> -[int
> -main()
> -{
> - /* The Stardent Vistra knows sizeof(long double), but does not
> +AC_TRY_COMPILE(,
> +[/* The Stardent Vistra knows sizeo
--- Steve Robbins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-8<-
> Wow, that's pretty clever! But since any nonzero value is considered
> "true" by C, I worry whether a comparison is guaranteed to return `1' if
> true. To my surprise, my second edition K+R claims that this is so for
> ANSI C. Has it always be
> "Steve" == Steve Robbins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Steve> Has it always been the case that `0<5' is `1'?
Yes.
Tom
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Akim Demaille writes:
>
[...]
> Thanks for the logs!
Let me know when I should run another set of tests.
> Akim
Akim, you could help folks like me by distributing some sort of wrapper
script that does the following:
- run make test
- for every failed te
> "Erez" == Erez Zadok <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Erez> Akim, you could help folks like me by distributing some sort of
Erez> wrapper script that does the following:
Erez> - run make test
It should be "make check".
Erez> - for every failed test, run the debug*.sh script and record its out
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Tom Tromey writes:
> > "Erez" == Erez Zadok <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Erez> Akim, you could help folks like me by distributing some sort of
> Erez> wrapper script that does the following:
>
> Erez> - run make test
>
> It should be "make check".
Right.
> "Erez" == Erez Zadok <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Erez> That would be even better, b/c it'll extend to every package.
Erez> Question: is the "make check" interface and behavior expected to
Erez> be the same for all packages that use GNU auto*?
Nope. Right now the interface is that you run
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Earnie Boyd writes:
>--- Steve Robbins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Has it always been the case that `0<5' is `1'?
>
>I think I remember cases (VAX?) of 0<5 produces -1.
Dear me. Actually, BCPL's truth value is -1, so I can believe early
versions of C might behav
Olly> Dear me. Actually, BCPL's truth value is -1, so I can believe early
Olly> versions of C might behave the same way.
It seems unlikely that this is important.
Olly> I'm unsure how `int a[0];' will be handled by various compilers.
gcc accepts this as an extension.
It is useful when using th
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Tom Tromey writes:
>Olly> Dear me. Actually, BCPL's truth value is -1, so I can believe early
>Olly> versions of C might behave the same way.
>
>It seems unlikely that this is important.
I tend to agree, but there's an equally tidy solution which avoids the
issue.
%% Olly Betts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> gcc accepts this as an extension.
>> It is useful when using the "struct hack", at least.
ob> Ah yes, of course. Not a great justification though, since an
ob> array size of one gives a much more portable struct hack (albeit
ob> slightly ug
On Feb 17, 2000, Linus Nordberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How do one get on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list?
It's not a mailing list, just an alias for whoever is the current
maintainer of those files.
> One thought is to add an option to config.guess enabling some sort
> of detailed mode, report
On Feb 17, 2000, Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> defined. BTW, personally I would complain to its author: AM_ and
> actually all the `A[A-Z]_' are reserved by Autoconf and Co. Unless it
> is planed that this macro becomes an official Automake macros, it is
> misleading to name it AM_
Mal Malachy Morrow
New Africa Technology Holdings
E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mal Malachy Morrow
New Africa Technology Holdings
E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Feb 19, 2000, Olly Betts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This defect is easy enough to correct by making use of your idea of a
> potentially negative array dimension - we can try compiling "int
> a[(char)-1];" which will compile if char is unsigned, and fail if it's
> signed. Revised patch attac
22 matches
Mail list logo
