Hi,
I have a problem where I have a code which compiles fine when I use
shared libraries, but it doesn't work when I use --disable-shared as an
argument to configure. The Makefile.am looks like
CXX = g++
bin_programs = SinglePipeline
SinglePipeline_SOURCES = SinglePipeline.cc
SinglePipeline_LDA
On Thu, 27 Jun 2002, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
> >>> "adl" == Alexandre Duret-Lutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If nobody knows about a system which doesn't support `-a' or
> `-o' alone, I'd suggest to keep using them in the Autoconf test
> suite. This way we'll see failures on these systems
> From: Alexandre Duret-Lutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 10:09:22 +0200
>
> I don't get it. The issue that you and the Autoconf manual
> describe is that `-a' and `-o' cannot be used *together*.
It's more complicated than that, due to combinations with other
operators. For exa
>>> "adl" == Alexandre Duret-Lutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
adl> What Clint suggests (and your patch does) is to never use `-a'
adl> or `-o' *alone*; this makes quite a difference to me. It would
adl> be worth to document this if this really is a portability issue.
If nobody knows a
>>> "Paul" == Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> From: Alexandre Duret-Lutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 18:44:45 +0200
Clint> if [ -f $src -o -d $src ]
Clint> This is not strictly POSIX-conformant.
>>
>> Damn! Are they removing things between revisions?
Paul
> From: Alexandre Duret-Lutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 18:44:45 +0200
> Clint> if [ -f $src -o -d $src ]
> Clint> This is not strictly POSIX-conformant.
>
> Damn! Are they removing things between revisions?
No, this conformance issue has been in the standard for a deca
