Hi Matt,
* Matt Kowalczyk wrote on Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 12:33:54AM CEST:
>
> I am using the gtk library and to compile it properly with automake I have
> to do this:
>
> AM_LDFLAGS = -lcrypto -lglib-2.0 -lgtk-x11-2.0 -lgdk-x11-2.0
> -latk-1.0-lgdk_pixbuf-
> 2.0 -lm -lpangoxft-1.0 -lpangox-1.0 -
On Wed, 2006-03-29 at 10:02 +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> You definitely want to put dependent libraries (those `-lfoolib' flags)
> into one of the automake Makefile macros LIBS, someprogram_LDADD,
> libsomelibrary_LIBADD, or similar, and not into *_LDFLAGS.
I hear this advice from time to time
Hi Braden,
* Braden McDaniel wrote on Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 10:32:37AM CEST:
> On Wed, 2006-03-29 at 10:02 +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
>
> > You definitely want to put dependent libraries (those `-lfoolib' flags)
> > into one of the automake Makefile macros LIBS, someprogram_LDADD,
> > libsomeli
Hi Paul,
* Paul Eggert wrote on Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 08:05:27PM CET:
>
> My gnulib additions ran into a problem when I actually tried to use
> them on GNU tar. The problem is that, even with the changes, GNU tar
> still assumes that 1 << (sizeof (int) * CHAR_BIT - 1) is valid. But
> this isn't
Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi Braden,
>
> * Braden McDaniel wrote on Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 10:32:37AM CEST:
>> Is this advice really still relevant? Are all those packages that apply
>> -l and -L together as a unit Doing It Wrong?
>
> Yes. And anybody trying to link completely s
On Sat, 2006-03-25 at 11:45 +0100, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Any reasons against this plan?
Basically none.
But ... current cvs autoconf's configure seems completely defective to
me:
With a fresh cvs checkout as of a couple of minutes ago on FC4:
# ./configure --prefix=/opt/gnu
checking for a BS
Hi Ralf,
* Ralf Corsepius wrote on Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 02:26:37PM CEST:
> On Sat, 2006-03-25 at 11:45 +0100, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > Any reasons against this plan?
>
> Basically none.
>
> But ... current cvs autoconf's configure seems completely defective to
> me:
> checking for perl... no
On Wed, 2006-03-29 at 10:41 +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Hi Braden,
>
> * Braden McDaniel wrote on Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 10:32:37AM CEST:
> > On Wed, 2006-03-29 at 10:02 +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> >
> > > You definitely want to put dependent libraries (those `-lfoolib' flags)
> > > into on
Hello.
I have a C++ program and a library written in C++ that I wish to AC_CHECK_LIB
for, when trying that AC_CHECK_LIB fails miserably since the name mangling
hides the function name. It would be nice if the following were true:
a) AC_CHECK_LIB takes a PROLOGUE argument, just like AC_LANG_CALL a
Hi Braden,
* Braden McDaniel wrote on Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 06:18:02PM CEST:
> On Wed, 2006-03-29 at 10:41 +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > * Braden McDaniel wrote on Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 10:32:37AM CEST:
> > >
[ -l* in *_LDFLAGS ]
> > That's very likely because you rarely do static linking.
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
NotDashEscaped: You need GnuPG to verify this message
On Sun, Mar 26, 2006 at 06:41:03PM +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> OK. Then let me reformulate the question into a proposition: please
> finish all patches you want in the next release, and bugs yo
Hello:
I'm trying to complie the Minigui which need the autoconfig. But when I
ran the ./configure it reports as flow :
checking minigui/common.h usability... yes
checking minigui/common.h presence... no
configure: WARNING: minigui/common.h: accepted by the compiler, reject
ed by the preproce
Hi,
When the AC_TRY_RUN macro runs a program, it invokes it with the simple
command
./a.out
When cross-compiling, obviously, this test will fail or produce output
that isn't correct for the target platform.
However, on some multiprocessor machines with a separate execution node,
it's possible
[ Apologies, my mailer probably messes up your name ]
Hello,
* 冰剑萧 wrote on Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 08:16:23AM CEST:
> Hello:
> I'm trying to complie the Minigui which need the autoconfig. But when I
> ran the ./configure it reports as flow :
>
> checking minigui/common.h usability... yes
> ch
Hi Bernd,
* Bernd Jendrissek wrote on Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 08:19:23PM CEST:
>
> Just because I like regenerating configure and friends when building
> from source (there could be virii in a configure script, ya know
> ), I found I had to do something like this when bootstrapping
> 2.59b with 2.59
Hi James,
* James Laird wrote on Tue, Mar 28, 2006 at 07:50:53PM CEST:
>
> When the AC_TRY_RUN macro runs a program, it invokes it with the simple
> command
> ./a.out
> When cross-compiling, obviously, this test will fail or produce output
> that isn't correct for the target platform.
>
> Howe
Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What would tar need? The value of $ac_shiftbits and $ac_signbits
> as `#define's?
Only shiftbits. C source code can compute signbits itself, with the
expression ((type) -1 < 0).
The tricky bit here is that ac_shiftbits is not always calculated, and
Hi,
I naively tried to use AC_CHECK_FILE(S) on /dev/stdin /dev/stdout
and /dev/stderr to detect their presence, but the test result is 'no' for
these 'files'. The result is 'yes', however, for /dev/null.
Is there a more appropriate test for the presence of these special
files? or
It's a good plan, except I think we'll need at least two alpha
releases. There are too many pending changes. (And I see I need to
get my gnulib changes in soon... :-)
___
Autoconf mailing list
Autoconf@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/aut
Hi Paul,
* Paul Eggert wrote on Thu, Mar 30, 2006 at 09:18:00AM CEST:
> It's a good plan, except I think we'll need at least two alpha
> releases. There are too many pending changes.
While I don't mind doing two alpha releases, wouldn't it be more
sensible to postpone the alpha release until all
20 matches
Mail list logo
