On Mon, 3 Jul 2000, Mo DeJong wrote:
> if test -n "$GCC"; then
> AC_MSG_CHECKING([if the compiler understands -pipe])
> OLDCC="$CC"
> CC="$CC -pipe"
> AC_TRY_COMPILE(,,
> AC_MSG_RESULT(yes),
> CC="$OLDCC"
> AC_MSG_RESULT(no))
> fi
My concern is, on some platforms gcc -pipe
On Mon, 3 Jul 2000, Mo DeJong wrote:
> > My concern is, on some platforms gcc -pipe just silently fails to create
> > an output file but does not return an error code.
>
> That sounds like the sort of "feature test" that autoconf
> should be doing to make sure -pipe can be used. Could
> you writ
On 12 Jul 2000, Russ Allbery wrote:
> And even more so with accept; isn't what type the third argument is just a
> matter of compiler warnings in practice? Are there systems where accept
> actually breaks if you use an int * where a socklen_t * or a size_t * was
> expected?
Yes. size_t may be a
On 16 Jul 2000, Russ Allbery wrote:
> My macro instead does *tzname = "UTC". I'm not aware of any platform that
> uses these variables but doesn't allow the user to modify them, so that
> seems to work.
Seems reasonable, but the fact that you have to wonder in the first place
makes this the see
