Re: svn copy conflicts with autotools ?

kefile.in aclocal.m4 compile config.guess config.sub configure \ config.h.in depcomp install-sh ltmain.sh missing py-compile ylwrap if test "$1" != "clean" ; then # bootstrap echo "---autoreconf---" autoreconf -v -i -f fi --- Feel free to use this as a temp

Re: question regarding AC_CHECK_LIB

s for gcc and add them to LDFLAGS for the AC_CHECK_LIB. It is probably easiest to harness Libtool for that. If you want to use libtool for your autoconf tests, then it may be good to know about the following issue: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libtool/2004-11/msg00372.html> Best rega

Re: Writing tests using Libtool

I did this by writing my own variant of these macros. You might want to check out this thread: It also explains the upward compatibility problems with such an approach. Best regards, Sander On woensdag, feb 9, 2005, at 13:30 Europe

Re: AC_CHECK_LIB for shared libraries

Feel free to use the one I am using. You can find it in the following post: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libtool/2004-10/msg00222.html Are you also aware of this issue?: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libtool/2004-11/msg00372.html Best regards, Sander On woensdag, feb 16, 2005, at 12:26 E

Re: using FC *and* F77, or FC *instead of* F77?

Hi, I do not know whether it is recommended behavior, but you could add the following to the top of your Makefile.am --- F77=$(FC) FFLAGS=$(FCFLAGS) --- and only use a AC_PROG_FC in your configure.ac. This is what I usually do when I have mixed F77/F90 code. Best regards, Sander On 8-jan-20

AC_CHECK_PROG and 'test -x'

ted, and does the -x option have the same semantics on all these systems). 3) Is anyone one the list willing to implement any changes to support 'test -x' for AC_CHECK_PROG, or do I have to device a patch myself (since we are now in the holiday season I may have some time to do this

Re: Literate programming with noweb ...

A simple Makefile.am like this: --- SUFFIXES = .nw .nw.cpp: cp $< $@ .nw.h: cp $< $@ BUILT_SOURCES = foo_h.h bin_PROGRAMS = foo foo_SOURCES = foo_c.nw foo_h.nw --- works for me if my foo_c.nw is just a source file and foo_h.nw is just an include file. Hope this helps. Regard

Re: typedef signed short int16;

I solved the problem with the help of the AC_DEFINE_INTEGER_BITS macro from the GNU Autoconf Macro Archive () together with the following calls in my configure.ac: --- AC_DEFINE_INTEGER_BITS([uint8_t], [u_int8_t], [un

Re: typedef signed short int16;

/Amsterdam, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: On Mon, Mar 17, 2003 at 06:30:41PM +0100, Sander Niemeijer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I solved the problem with the help of the AC_DEFINE_INTEGER_BITS macro from the GNU Autoconf Macro Archive (<http://www.gnu.org/software/ac-archiv

Detecting availability of a shared libray

only available as a static version. So my question now is, does anybody know whether there is a way to explicitly test for the availability of the shared version of the external library? Regards, Sander Niemeijer

Re: Detecting availability of a shared libray

Is there really nobody who can help me further with this? Regards, Sander On vrijdag, sep 5, 2003, at 17:25 Europe/Amsterdam, Sander Niemeijer wrote: Hi all, I have a package that produces a shared/static library via libtool. However this package needs to make use of some external library for

Re: Detecting availability of a shared libray

003, at 17:25 Europe/Amsterdam, Sander Niemeijer wrote: Hi all, I have a package that produces a shared/static library via libtool. However this package needs to make use of some external library for data import/export. Since my library has both a shared and a static version this external library also need