On Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 09:33:33PM -0700, Mo DeJong wrote:
>
> This is really messy. Why is there no way to find the length
> of a file in bash? That is all we really want to do. If the
Bourne shell (e.g., /bin/sh), not bash.
> file gets bigger, then -g is supported. What about ls -S,
> is that
On Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 08:57:43PM -0700, Mo DeJong wrote:
> Ok, how about this patch? It uses cmp instead of wc.
> I like this approach because we do not depend on
> the output format of the wc program.
no: some compilers put timestamps into the object files.
--
Thomas E. Dickey <[EMAIL PROT
On Sun, Jun 18, 2000 at 01:44:14PM -0700, Paul Eggert wrote:
> If the file's size is sufficiently small and if the locale is C (which
> is the case here), you should be able to compute the file's size with
> this portable script:
you left out an assumption: not all 'ls' programs are consistent ab
On Thu, Jul 13, 2000 at 01:48:15AM -0700, Felix Lee wrote:
> Lars J. Aas writes:
> > : -for warning in `IFS=,; echo syntax,$WARNINGS,$warnings | tr [A-Z] [a-z]`
> > : +for warning in `IFS=,; echo syntax,$WARNINGS,$warnings | tr '[A-Z]' '[a-z]'`
> > Why use the braces at all? Are they really neces
On Mon, Jul 17, 2000 at 08:15:17PM +0200, Akim Demaille wrote:
> : I missed this thread: what is your counter-example?
>
> I know what you are going to say: we don't need autoheader, we should
> just spit a cleaned up version of confdefs.h, as your patch does. But
> I don't share this opinion, s
On Fri, Jul 21, 2000 at 07:56:35PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jul 21, 2000, Greg McGary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> This sounds reasonably reasonable :-), but I wonder if people
> >> wouldn't complain about the additional seldom-use
On Mon, Jul 24, 2000 at 11:35:21AM +0200, Akim Demaille wrote:
> Maybe we should AC_CHECK_DECL each function we AC_CHECK?
while I do that for development purposes in tin & vile, it would be a bad
idea in general since it makes the configure time much longer.
--
Thomas E. Dickey <[EMAIL PROTECTE
On Fri, Aug 11, 2000 at 02:58:43PM +0200, Akim Demaille wrote:
>
> ... we finally have a snapshot! No, I really mean it! We have one!
>
> Well, we will soon have one :)
>
> This snapshot is probably not ready for full scale use, so we'd like
I see (besides the grammatical errors in the docum
On Thu, Aug 24, 2000 at 11:06:46AM +0200, Diego Sevilla Ruiz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi all:
>
> Some time ago I reported a bug on autoconf 2.49a... what happened
> with this bug? Is it a bug? I received no response, so I cannot kn
On Sun, Aug 27, 2000 at 01:31:43PM -0700, W. Reilly Cooley, Esq. wrote:
> I'm running into various dependecies which are causing me much grief.
> I updated several GNU packages in my source tree to the versions on alpha,
> because I couldn't get them to build on the base system I'm working on
> (g
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 03:28:06PM -0700, Paul Eggert wrote:
>Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 14:20:12 -0400 (EDT)
>From: Pavel Roskin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>I haven't checked the older versions, but this behaviour of GNU grep is
>weird (it may or may not be a bug, dependent on the standar
On Thu, Aug 31, 2000 at 03:50:48PM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> 4) Somebody has already been confused by an unquoted plus while having
> problems with ncurses headers.
...but we never did find the root cause -- but found some suggested workarounds
that only lead into further discussion.
--
Thom
On Thu, Aug 31, 2000 at 02:41:48PM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> You shouldn't believe it. The answer is Plan 9. See the discussion in
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] starting with
no: not the "answer", but the problem.
(read some of the other manpages ;-)
Plan 9 is not-invented-here run amok...
--
Thomas
On Thu, Aug 31, 2000 at 12:19:56PM -0700, Paul Eggert wrote:
> OK, but Plan 9 grep is not the same as traditional grep at all. It
> uses a syntax that is almost an extension of POSIX egrep (i.e. it uses
> EREs, not BREs). Unfortunately it's not a pure extension: the bracket
> expression syntax i
On Thu, Aug 31, 2000 at 04:12:35PM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> If the compiler is "wary" and indicates missing includes by the exit
> status its subtle warnings should be acceptable. If the compiler is
> "careless" its warnings should be taken with care.
>
> Also it is better for developers to s
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 02:12:34PM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> -
> However, in a few places the macros need to use brackets (usually in C
> program text or regular expressions). In those places, they use the `m4'
> builtin command `changequote' to temporarily change the quote charact
On Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 09:17:33AM +0200, Akim Demaille wrote:
> |
> | This patch makes autoconf prefer configure.gnu over configure when
> | configuring subdirectories; this is usefull if these subdirectories also
> | contain packages not using autoconf.
> |
> | This patch originates from the G
On Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 12:22:24PM +0200, Akim Demaille wrote:
> >>>>> "Thomas" == Thomas Dickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Thomas> On Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 09:17:33AM +0200, Akim Demaille wrote:
> >> | | This patch makes autoconf prefer
On Mon, Dec 25, 2000 at 10:11:23AM -0500, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> > Yes, that version should have been named 3.x too, imho.
>
> No. We pretend to be fully compatible with correctly written
> configure.in's.
well, one reliable test for that is whether one can use the same
configure.in on old/new ve
On Fri, Jan 12, 2001 at 03:25:50PM -0800, Wan-Teh Chang wrote:
> "Lars J. Aas" wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 11, 2001 at 10:37:01AM -0800, Wan-Teh Chang wrote:
> > : I am trying to use autoconf on Windows with the
> > : MKS Toolkit, which consists of a Korn shell and
> > : the usual Unix utilities.
On Wed, Jan 17, 2001 at 10:13:58AM +0100, Akim Demaille wrote:
> > "Lars" == Lars J Aas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Lars> A better fix would be to have AC_PATH_PROG (or whichever macro
> Lars> it is that searches for the compiler) to also consider implied
> Lars> exe- extensions on system
On Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 05:01:32PM +0100, Akim Demaille wrote:
> The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
> that has been posted to gnu.utils.bug as well.
>
>
> The Autoconf team is extremely proud (and quite relieved) to announce
> the birth of Autoconf 2.49d, our release candidat
On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 11:48:41PM +, John Poltorak wrote:
> After setting a number of environment variables and running
> sh ./configure
> followed by make I got the following error at the end:-
...
> Making all in doc
> make[1]: Entering directory `/eval/autoconf-2.49d/doc'
> make[1]: :: Co
On Tue, Apr 10, 2001 at 10:58:37AM +0200, Akim Demaille wrote:
>
> Well, I will disable the to-be-written chapter in the doc, I don't
> have time to write it now, and I don't feel comfortable with using
> Elf's material without his approval.
>
> Let's flush all the documentation related patches,
On Tue, Apr 10, 2001 at 02:17:19AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I think 2.51 will probably be released soon afterwards. Nonetheless, I
> > would like to introduce deep internal changes: introduce autom4te. I'd
> > like autom4te to be written in Pe
On Tue, Apr 10, 2001 at 11:24:49AM +0200, Akim Demaille wrote:
> Using Perl we let us factor the code, and concentrate on our features
> instead of others' misfeatures.
indeed: if you're not going to make it compatible, why not make that
fact known in the proposal for new work. autoconf 2.49e is
On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 11:13:10PM +0200, Tim Van Holder wrote:
> > You found it. Configure.in is loaded with changequote() calls.
> >
> >
> > > That feature is broken in the current alpha versions of autoconf,
> > > has been reported a few times (and shows up with this symptom).
> >
> >
> > Some
On Sat, May 19, 2001 at 03:00:38PM +0200, Akim Demaille wrote:
>
> (partly stolen from AC_CHECK_DECLS) but this requires cvs autoconf, I
> believe.
>
> Yes, it does. And if you require 2.50, then just use AC_CHECK_DECLS :)
>
> Is there a good way to say this in 2.13-speak, so
On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 07:42:47PM -0700, Paul Eggert wrote:
> This case is catered to by the usual trick of '#define vfork fork' if
> a working vfork is not available.
except that the existing test doesn't check if vfork is already #define'd
in a header file.
--
Thomas E. Dickey <[EMAIL PROTEC
On Tue, Jul 24, 2001 at 06:44:04PM -0700, Paul Eggert wrote:
> > Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 02:10:19 +0200
> > From: Ralf Corsepius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > For me, it is subdir handling in autoconf-2.5x.
>
> I don't use that, so I had no problem. :-)
>
> > A further problem is some of the new
On Tue, Aug 28, 2001 at 05:47:55PM -0400, Harlan Stenn wrote:
> autoconf (config.guess) doesn't seem to autodetect NeXT.
didn't the config.guess with autoconf 2.13 do this? (I recall a few people
who apparently were doing that, since they sent me bug reports for various
programs).
--
Thomas E
On Tue, Oct 30, 2001 at 11:44:43PM -0800, Paul Eggert wrote:
> > From: Paul Townsend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2001 02:21:48 -0500 (EST)
>
> > I just upgraded from autoconf-2.13 to autoconf-2.52 and either I
> > have done something incredibly stupid (an always present
> > possibil
On Wed, Oct 31, 2001 at 06:23:46AM -0500, Thomas E. Dickey wrote:
> On 31 Oct 2001, Akim Demaille wrote:
>
> > >>>>> "Thomas" == Thomas Dickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > Thomas> there were claims on this mailing list that 2.50
On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 05:13:22PM -0600, Robert Boehne wrote:
> Toni:
>
> Your testers don't need aclocal, autoconf, or automake installed unless
> they are making changes to Makefile.am or configure.ac. Once you
> generate "configure" that's all they need. If someone else's Makefile
> is runn
On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 10:20:14AM -0800, Paul Eggert wrote:
> > From: "Thomas E. Dickey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 08:55:49 -0500 (EST)
> >
> > I'd try replacing it with a single-quote.
>
> I'd try replacing
>
> \_ACEOF
>
> with
>
> '_ACEOF'
>
> uniformly throughout the
On Sun, Jan 27, 2002 at 10:35:11AM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> I think AC_CONFIG_LINKS should try `cp' as the final fallback, if both
> `ln -s' and `ln' fail. Perhaps try `cp -p' before a plain `cp'.
"cp -p" has some unfortunate side-effects (some versions copy the ownership
of the original
On Sun, Jan 27, 2002 at 04:14:58PM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>
> On Sun, 27 Jan 2002, Thomas Dickey wrote:
>
> > "cp -p" has some unfortunate side-effects (some versions copy the ownership
> > of the original file in addition to the protection)
>
> Why is
On Sun, Jan 27, 2002 at 04:44:28PM +0100, Akim Demaille wrote:
> >>>>> "Thomas" == Thomas Dickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Thomas> "cp -p" has some unfortunate side-effects (some versions copy
> Thomas> the ownership of the origina
On Sun, Jan 27, 2002 at 11:47:02AM -0700, Bob Proulx wrote:
> > > That's the way that cp -p pretty much always works, if the -p flag is
> > > supported. See, for example, the GNU fileutils documentation:
> >
> > not always (I'm pretty sure that very-old implementations of -p did not
> > copy _al
On Tue, Feb 05, 2002 at 05:26:10PM +, Lars Hecking wrote:
> > My question is, are SOME_VAR and SOME_OTHER_VAR things I should set
> > myself in the optional arguments to the AC_CHECK macros, or should I use
> > cache variables? I'm uneasy about using the latter, because I've had
> > trouble
On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 02:35:04PM +0100, Akim Demaille wrote:
> >> Anyway, there are so many scripts depending on these names, that
> >> whatever scheme will be chosen, we will keep them.
>
> Thomas> (such as AC_CHECK_LIB ;-)
>
> I must have lost the track here. Many people have asked for its
On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 01:08:46PM -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Whenever CVS autoconf is run, it leaves a directory autom4te.cache/ in the
> current directory. What does this save? Can it be removed sometime?
> Should this be documented?
if it's documented, one could claim it's not a bug, r
On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 02:25:20AM -0800, Bruce Korb wrote:
> If writing macros were easy, the novices would do it.
it's not exactly that - most people don't write tools (whether they consider
themselves novices or not).
--
Thomas E. Dickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://invisible-island.net
ftp://
On Sun, 21 Sep 2008, Keith Marshall wrote:
This "calling convention issue" is specific to MS-Windows, which is a
*very* minor target platform for autoconf; indeed native MS-Windows
doesn't even provide a shell which is capable of running an autoconf
configure script.
not really (I've been bit
On Mon, 27 Oct 2008, Steven R. Loomis wrote:
Hello,
autoconf 2.63 has worked well for our project (icu), except for an issue
with a bare carriage return (hereafter '^M') in status.m4 which shows up in
resulting configure scripts. The line in question is:
ac_cr='^M'
If I am not misreading t
I was suggesting (something to consider):
ac_cr=`echo X |tr X '\015'`
Thomas Dickey wrote:
On Mon, 27 Oct 2008, Steven R. Loomis wrote:
Hello,
autoconf 2.63 has worked well for our project (icu), except for an issue
with a bare carriage return (hereafter '^M') in status.m4 wh
On Thu, 11 Dec 2008, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Thursday 2008-12-11 21:38, Monty Taylor wrote:
Hey all,
I'm wondering if there is a best practice for getting paths such as
locaeldir or datadir into source code. As it stands now in the Makefile
I've got:
prefix= /usr/local
datarootdir= ${prefi
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
compiler, or test-application). Putting them in the generated config.h
doesn't run into that problem.
Only if done properly.
I agree (of course: putting them into the generated config.h is assumed
to be "done properly"). For the rest - your example
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
automake's toplevel configury applies this trick - It's borrowed from
there ;)
as you see, this is the autoconf list (and I'm uninterested in reporting
bugs in automake - I simply document them and move on).
--
Thomas E. Dickey
http://invisible-islan
On Sun, 22 Feb 2009, Allan Caffee wrote:
AC_CHECK_LIB (AFAIK) is not intended to handle static libraries. The
reason for this is that compilers handle static libraries quite
differently than shared object libraries. Compilers treat static
libraries as a single big object file to be included al
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009, Eric Blake wrote:
AC_FUNC_FSEEKO was rewritten for 2.61, but a typo rendered it broken in
that release, so it didn't work again until 2.62.
This is exactly why I hate relying on cache variables. :)
Relying on documented cache variables is fine. But you are correct tha
On Mon, 13 Apr 2009, Thomas Moulard wrote:
On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 1:21 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
This is very doable. In fact, it is how the m4 testsuite allows the user
to specify an alternate $SED program [1]. You can use atlocal.in to
perform initialization of your $TESTSUITE_PREFIX before a
On Tue, 28 Apr 2009, John Calcote wrote:
AC_ARG_VAR([RUBY])# optional - adds RUBY to 'influential variables' in
configure --help
AC_CHECK_PROGS([RUBY], [ruby])
On the systems at hand, ruby is installed with a version number appended,
e.g., ruby1.8
ymmv
--
Thomas E. Dickey
http://invisib
On Fri, 1 May 2009, Patrick Welche wrote:
I haven't seen breakages without this patch, but it seems logical to me...
supposedly "X11R7" moved everything back into non-specific paths such as
/usr/bin
--
Thomas E. Dickey
http://invisible-island.net
ftp://invisible-island.net
_
On Fri, 17 Jul 2009, Alberto Luaces wrote:
El Viernes 17 Julio 2009ES 05:25:42 Peter Lee escribió:
From the current thread, this list can be:
[snip]
microsoft visual studio,
No, Peter: Microsoft visual studio won't maintain, import nor export an
autoconf project unless you use it as a plain
On Fri, 17 Jul 2009, Alberto Luaces wrote:
Thomas,
El Viernes 17 Julio 2009ES 11:04:42 Thomas Dickey escribió:
probably the same can be said of the other proposed examples.
(by the way, all are extensible, so references to that aspect are moot).
I have personally tried Kdevelop version 3
On Fri, 17 Jul 2009, Peter Lee wrote:
Thank you Alberto Luaces !
To answer my own question:
I would like to ask what IDEs on the web have the ability to
maintain/import/export an antoconf-based project?
I am expecting a list of them, if there are.
From the current thread, this list can be:
On Fri, 17 Jul 2009, Peter Lee wrote:
Thank you Thomas Dickey for your contribution to this discussion.
Does anyone know any not-so-pouplar IDEs that have support to autoconf
? beside the currently listed:
kdevelop,
eclipse,
emacs,
vim,
more than one text-editor (you've listed two)
On Fri, 17 Jul 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
Thomas Dickey writes:
more than one text-editor (you've listed two) does syntax-highlighting
for autoconf scripts, is scriptable, and can run subprocesses (emacs and
vim aren't IDEs, however - though there are _probably_ scripts for eac
On Fri, 17 Jul 2009, Ben Pfaff wrote:
Thomas Dickey writes:
oh... does emacs show class diagrams reconstructed from source code?
http://sourceforge.net/projects/oo-browser/
actually that one looks like just another of the multitude of dead
programs on SourceForge...
--
Thomas E
On Sat, 18 Jul 2009, Thomas Dickey wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jul 2009, Ben Pfaff wrote:
Thomas Dickey writes:
oh... does emacs show class diagrams reconstructed from source code?
http://sourceforge.net/projects/oo-browser/
actually that one looks like just another of the multitude of dead
On Thu, 30 Jul 2009, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jul 2009, Monty Taylor wrote:
The ever helpful setting of -g into CXXFLAGS by AC_PROG_CXX is incorrect
on Sun Studio (IMHO). Currently, the test checks for Sun Studio compiler
and, if so, injects -g. The problem is, -g on Sun Studio means
On Thu, 30 Jul 2009, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jul 2009, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
The terrible part about how this mechanism works is that it injects into
CXXFLAGS itself, which means that, without my configure script can't
override that via the setting of AM_CXXFLAGS.
I cannot parse thi
On Fri, 7 Aug 2009, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
If I have this in my configure.ac
AC_MSG_CHECKING([if gcc uses the GNU or Sun linker])
then run the configure script, I see:
checking if gcc uses the GNU or Sun linker... checking for a sed that does
not truncate output... /opt/csw/bin/gsed
On Tue, 22 Sep 2009, Patrick Welche wrote:
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 10:49:58AM +0200, Steffen Dettmer wrote:
I hope I don't ask a FAQ. If so, an URL would be appreciated.
I've read here that someone could (should?) write
#include
specifying a system header instead of the IMHO correct
#incl
On Tue, 3 Nov 2009, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
* Steffen Dettmer wrote on Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 02:58:30PM CET:
On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 1:49 AM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
names='gcc gcc[0-9_-]* cc c89 c99 cgcc clang llvm-gcc sdcc tcc
xlc xlc_r bgxlc icc ecc pgcc pathcc ccc nvcc cl bcc bcc32'
...
On Sat, 28 Nov 2009, Eric Blake wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
According to Rasmus Lerdorf on 11/28/2009 6:42 AM:
Basically the diversions are there to organize the phases of the checks.
From
http://svn.php.net/viewvc/php/php-src/branches/PHP_5_3/configure.in?view=markup
On Sat, 28 Nov 2009, Eric Blake wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
According to Thomas Dickey on 11/28/2009 8:26 AM:
For more recent changes, one would assume you knew offhand the history.
autoconf, and I have no interest in trying to make it work). But, on the
that
On Sat, 28 Nov 2009, Eric Blake wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
According to Thomas Dickey on 11/28/2009 8:40 AM:
well, in my view, not bothering to research a detail to provide an
accurate reply falls short of professional behavior.
You get the level of support that
On Thu, 21 Jan 2010, David Byron wrote:
On Thursday, January 21, 2010, John Calcote wrote:
On 1/21/2010 4:38 PM, David Byron wrote:
$ cpp -dM foo.h | grep FOO
#define FOO an_interesting_value
Good idea. Replace cpp -dM with $CPP $CPPFLAGS and I'm getting close. Also
starting to convince mys
On Sun, 21 Feb 2010, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Sun, 21 Feb 2010, Bruno Haible wrote:
Is someone aware of a platform that does not have a /usr/bin/printf or
/bin/printf program?
I am not able to find any. However, the behavior of printf surely changes
over time as standards move forward.
On Sun, 21 Feb 2010, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Sun, 21 Feb 2010, Thomas Dickey wrote:
I am not able to find any. However, the behavior of printf surely changes
over time as standards move forward.
SunOS didn't have one (I don't see it in the manpages, at any rate).
I did check
On Sat, 24 Apr 2010, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Kārlis Repsons wrote:
Hello in here...
Hopefully this is sufficiently appropriate place to ask for some help with
making a portable library, which should be usable on both Unixes and
Windows. To be short, I'm still quite confused and would appreci
On Sun, 25 Apr 2010, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Saturday 24 April 2010 17:27:28 Thomas Dickey wrote:
On Sat, 24 Apr 2010, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
K??rlis Repsons wrote:
Hopefully this is sufficiently appropriate place to ask for some help
with making a portable library, which should be usable
On Sun, 5 Sep 2010, Russell Shaw wrote:
Hi,
When should AC_CACHE_CHECK be used? Whenever the user uninstalls
something, wouldn't the cache become invalid?
...only if the user happened to uninstall something during the configure
process. After that, AC_CACHE_CHECK is irrelevant.
--
Thomas E.
On Sun, 5 Sep 2010, Russell Shaw wrote:
Thomas Dickey wrote:
On Sun, 5 Sep 2010, Russell Shaw wrote:
Hi,
When should AC_CACHE_CHECK be used? Whenever the user uninstalls
something, wouldn't the cache become invalid?
...only if the user happened to uninstall something during the conf
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 02:05:49PM +0300, anatoly techtonik wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In this build on Ubuntu x86_64 autoconf is unable to find X11
> libraries:
> https://travis-ci.org/techtonik/PDCurses/builds/101477536
> However, it works with explicit configure option
> --x-libraries=/usr/lib/x8
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:11:47AM +0300, anatoly techtonik wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 1:19 PM, Thomas Dickey wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 02:05:49PM +0300, anatoly techtonik wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> In this build on Ubuntu x86_64 autoconf
On Mon, 13 Sep 2004, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On Mon, 2004-09-13 at 11:40, Dale Mellor wrote:
> > For the record...
> >
> >I recieved about half a dozen responses to this and the overriding
> > message is: config.h is worse than useless for packages which install
> > libraries and public header
On Mon, 13 Sep 2004, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On Mon, 2004-09-13 at 11:40, Dale Mellor wrote:
> > For the record...
> >
> >I recieved about half a dozen responses to this and the overriding
> > message is: config.h is worse than useless for packages which install
> > libraries and public header
On Thu, 7 Oct 2004, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
> Kelley sent in a patch to have aclocal recognize AC_DEFUN_ONCE
> definitions.
>
> The AC_DEFUN_ONCE macro was introduced in Autoconf 2.50 and is
> not mentioned in the manual. I didn't know about it, until that
> patch came in. Anyway since it's
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004, Bruno Haible wrote:
> is to make filename sit in a temporary directory under /tmp, not directly
> in /tmp ?
For the truly paranoid, even that is not sufficient.
>
> Not bad, but still not perfect: mktemp is not a POSIX standardized
> utility, and $RANDOM is bash specific. So
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004, Thomas Dickey wrote:
(sorry about the previous - missed keystroke)
> > Not bad, but still not perfect: mktemp is not a POSIX standardized
> > utility, and $RANDOM is bash specific. So what do you propose on POSIX
> > systems without mktemp and bash? Jus
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004, Bruno Haible wrote:
> Thomas Dickey wrote:
> > > is to make filename sit in a temporary directory under /tmp, not directly
> > > in /tmp ?
> >
> > For the truly paranoid, even that is not sufficient.
>
> Why? The creation of the temp
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004, Paul Eggert wrote:
Sam Steingold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
how come gcc looks in /usr/local/include but not in /usr/local/lib?
That's more of a GCC question than an Autoconf question. It's a long
story; for a first cut you can look here:
only a small cut, since it doesn't ex
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005, Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng wrote:
A few weeks ago I wrote to the Gnu coding standards people, with a
suggestion that there should be a DEPENDENCIES file, so that
It would be nice if autoconf did that for itself. I don't recall a
"recent" release which satisfied that goal (and
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005, Thomas Dickey wrote:
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005, Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng wrote:
A few weeks ago I wrote to the Gnu coding standards people, with a
suggestion that there should be a DEPENDENCIES file, so that
It would be nice if autoconf
On Sun, 1 May 2005, Ilkka Urtamo wrote:
Sorry if this is too simple, but I do this to only see warnings and
errors:
make > /dev/null
Works, but not exactly what I had in mind.
Any other suggestions?
what I do is (via an autoconf macro of course) substitute an "echo"
statement and a "@" at the b
On Wed, 22 Jun 2005, Stepan Kasal wrote:
Hello Claudio.
On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 11:13:24PM -0700, Claudio Fontana wrote:
track it myself but got lost somewhere between 2.13 or
so and 2.49 (are there in-between versions at all? the
gnu ftp repository shown none).
Actually, I'm surprised to he
On Wed, 13 Jul 2005, Paul D. Smith wrote:
I have a bunch of macros in GNU make that try to determine whether the
compiler groks ANSI C, like this:
#if defined (__cplusplus) || (defined (__STDC__) && __STDC__)
But, that doesn't work on Windows because the Windows compilers do this:
#define
On Thu, 14 Jul 2005, Stepan Kasal wrote:
Hello,
On Wed, Jul 13, 2005 at 07:38:25AM -0400, Bob Rossi wrote:
Is this a bug in autoconf?
yes, this is a bug in autoconf. It is well known, and it'll be fixed in
Autoconf 3, in a distant future...
...perhaps in an alternate universe as well.
no
On Wed, 31 Aug 2005, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
Short story: [ ] are quotation characters within configure.ac files.
That's one reason why many m4 macros use "test" instead for readability.
The main reason is that some older systems do not have "[" as an alias
for "test".
--
Thomas E. Dickey
http
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
"KM" == Keith MARSHALL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
KM> When I write my configure.ac, aclocal.m4, or acinclude.m4, *every*
KM> macro I use is, from my perspective, an *autoconf* macro. That some
KM> of these are called AC_*, AS_*, m4_*, or indee
On Fri, 2 Dec 2005, Keith Marshall wrote:
BTW, I don't think ac_default_prefix is officially documented -- its use can
be discovered by inspecting any generated configure script. Do beware that,
as an undocumented feature, it may not be supported by future autoconf
versions.
Furthermore, even
On Tue, 27 Dec 2005, Gary Kumfert wrote:
Am I correct that its been two years since the
last autoconf release?
two years, one month and 22 days (looking at file modification times).
Is there going to be another release? Soon?
a release implies that the maintainers will support it
(the mai
On Tue, 10 Jan 2006, Keith MARSHALL wrote:
Vadim Zeitlin wrote:
From your example, it appears that you are searching for functions
using their "uglified" Microsoft names.
That may be true, but other platforms (including Linux) deal in ugly
header file internals. The reason for it with Micro
On Tue, 10 Jan 2006, Keith MARSHALL wrote:
...and unlike Microsoft's headers, MinGW's are not designed to be
maintainable or readable - just random cut/paste excerpts from other
headers.
You are certainly entitled to this opinion, and I respect that, but I
would also respectfully beg to differ
On Tue, 17 Jan 2006, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
(c) Maybe there now also exists a version control system that allows
to store relative time stamp ordering(?) requirements and reproduce them
upon checkout. I have no idea whether such a thing exists, the number
of available systems has grown much, an
On Tue, 17 Jan 2006, Bob Rossi wrote:
On Tue, Jan 17, 2006 at 06:27:21AM -0500, Thomas Dickey wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jan 2006, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
(c) Maybe there now also exists a version control system that allows
to store relative time stamp ordering(?) requirements and reproduce them
upon
On Sat, 21 Jan 2006, Bruce Korb wrote:
Now, I have a curiosity question. Why this (unchanged) construct:
test -n "$tmp" && test -d "$tmp"
and not just: test -d "$tmp"
It is sufficient for every shell I know about. Even some pretty old
ones. :)
Some old shells would match an empty $
1 - 100 of 213 matches
Mail list logo
