On Tue, Mar 07, 2000 at 11:50:46AM +0100, Akim Demaille wrote:
: | eval set $list
: | while test $# -gt 0; do
: | echo $1
: | shift
: | done
:
: Excellent, thanks! I think this is the best means to handle the list
: here.
The most elegant solution I found (can't give it a rest already! ;) i
I'm OK with this patch. I'll apply the changes for the headers at
checkin if Franz doesn't have time to. One yes is still expected.
Akim
On Mar 8, 2000, Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm OK with this patch.
Ditto.
> One yes is still expected.
You got it :-)
--
Alexandre Oliva http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/ Enjoy Guaraná
Cygnus Solutions, a Red Hat companyaoliva@{redhat, cygnus}.com
Free Softwar
> "Alexandre" == Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Alexandre> You got it :-)
Well, finally I have a little problem: when you look at the full
context, there is already unistd.h above. I moved the #include block
which was discussed above the GETPAGESIZE one (originally it was
below
On Mar 8, 2000, Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I suggest to simply remove the second inclusion of unistd.h.
Agreed.
--
Alexandre Oliva http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/ Enjoy Guaraná
Cygnus Solutions, a Red Hat companyaoliva@{redhat, cygnus}.com
Free Software Develo
| On Tue, Mar 07, 2000 at 11:50:46AM +0100, Akim Demaille wrote:
| : | eval set $list
| : | while test $# -gt 0; do
| : | echo $1
| : | shift
| : | done
| :
| : Excellent, thanks! I think this is the best means to handle the list
| : here.
|
| The most elegant solution I found (can't give
On Mar 8, 2000, Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Now the question is, do we want to pollute
> autoconf.sh, a maintainer tool, with portability issues?
Yes, at least in this case.
> If yes, we need to
> eval set dummy $list
> shift
So be it. It's simple enough.
--
Alexandre Oliva
On Wed, Mar 08, 2000 at 11:09:07AM +0100, Akim Demaille wrote:
: | eval set $list
: | for elt in "$@"; do
: | echo $elt
: | done
: |
: | So there. Now you won't get any more suggestions from me :)
:
: I agree, this is perfect.
Actually, I was informed by John W. Eaton through private email t
On Mar 8, 2000, "Lars J. Aas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 08, 2000 at 11:09:07AM +0100, Akim Demaille wrote:
> : | eval set $list
> : | for elt in "$@"; do
> : | echo $elt
> : | done
> : |
> : | So there. Now you won't get any more suggestions from me :)
> :
> : I agree, this i
> "Lars" == Lars J Aas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Lars> Actually, I was informed by John W. Eaton through private email
Lars> that the 'in "$@"' part is the default and can therefore be
Lars> dropped. My opinion on this (which is influenced by my personal
Lars> sh-scripting conventions) is
On Wed, Mar 08, 2000 at 11:31:27AM +0100, Akim Demaille wrote:
: Lars> I think the dummy-approach is safest. I didn't look into which
: Lars> context this was to be used in, but I'd probably name it
: Lars> _ac_dummy or something like that...
:
: `dummy' is just a string here, there is no proble
> "Lars" == Lars J Aas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Lars> You can 'shift' out the dummy at once, though, and leave out the
Lars> case for it (I assume you'll have a switch/case inside the for
Lars> loop), but then you must use the ${1+"$@"} approach.
That's what I meant, dummy could be anythi
>
> > "Lars" == Lars J Aas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Lars> Actually, I was informed by John W. Eaton through private email
> Lars> that the 'in "$@"' part is the default and can therefore be
> Lars> dropped. My opinion on this (which is influenced by my personal
> Lars> sh-script
I would like to suggest again something which has been rejected the
first time...
I would like Autoconf to know PACKAGE and VERSION too. Of course it
is not essential to it as it is for Automake, but I would like it for
several small issues, each time for esthetic purposes.
1. It would allow t
> "Ralf" == Ralf Fassel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ralf> I have GNU m4 1.4 installed at this machine, would that be ok?
Fine!
Ralf> I'll give it a try. Results tomorrow :-)
Fine too :)
| In fact I think it is enough to
|
| | : t
| | s%#undef FOO$%#define FOO 1%;t t
| | s%#u
Hello!
> I would like Autoconf to know PACKAGE and VERSION too. Of course it
> is not essential to it as it is for Automake, but I would like it for
> several small issues, each time for esthetic purposes.
>
> 3. It would allow to solve parts of the wishes for a deep --help: each
>--help se
16 matches
Mail list logo
