On Fri, 4 Jul 2003, Peter Simons' Anti-Spam-Tool wrote:
> - English -
>
> Because I receive several dozen spam messages each day, I installed a
> small tool that will defer incoming mail message if it comes from an
> address it sees for the first time. This is the
On Tue, 18 Mar 2003, Earnie Boyd wrote:
> Thomas E. Dickey wrote:
> >
> > the autoconf maintainers do not appear to be interested in maintaining
> > compatibility with lex/yacc (other than paying lip-service to the notion).
> >
>
> Aren't you an autoconf ma
On Tue, 18 Mar 2003, Richard Dawe wrote:
> Hello.
>
> Akim Demaille wrote:
> [snip]
> > I think a lot could be done to improve the interface provided that we
> > require Bison and Flex. The problem here stems on the willingness to
> > be yacc/lex portable.
> [snip]
>
> Out of interest: Is it a ha
On Tue, 18 Mar 2003, Akim Demaille wrote:
> I don't think this is the right track, since flex and bison now
> generate more that just one file. Relying on something like -o is
> saner, but stdout is a dead end.
yacc & clones generate two files, lex one - unless you're referring to
some nonstanda
On Fri, 21 Feb 2003, John Burger wrote:
> It seems to be explicitly against the philosophy of Autoconf to do
> anything in response to particular hardware or OS versions. Rather,
back to the original point - changes were made to autoconf which made
it incompatible with known, widely-used version
On Wed, 19 Feb 2003, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Feb 2003, John W. Eaton wrote:
> >
> > But now? Do we really have to worry about these old systems? If
> > people enjoy the vintage hardware, then is it that bad if they can
> > only use vintage software on it as well?
>
> To install moder
On 4 Nov 2002, Akim Demaille wrote:
>- Why should I upgrade from 2.13?
more topical:
why should one upgrade from 2.50-2.53?
those versions are no longer maintained; they are incompatible
with this week's latest design creep.
--
T.E.Dickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://invisib
On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Lars Hecking wrote:
>
> > Hi Lorrie,
> >
> > You are not talking to the right list.
> >
> > If you still think its a portability issue in ./configure,
> > please trace this script with `sh -x ./configure --your-flags...'
> > and send the output to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> I don'
On Tue, 15 Oct 2002, Tom Lord wrote:
> A de facto set of bootstrap packages already exist. autoconf was
> first built for those packages, and it was used to make them
> extraordinarilly portable (to all unixen, VMS, and several systems
> you've all but forgetten about).
I've never seen the port
On 13 Sep 2002, Akim Demaille wrote:
> - Why should I upgrade from 2.53?
>
> Several bug fixes, improved portability, no known incompatibility with
> 2.53, forthcoming Automake 1.7 requires 2.54.
you just added one yesterday.
>- Why should I upgrade from 2.13?
>
> This version is no longe
On 25 Jul 2002, Akim Demaille wrote:
> >>>>> "Thomas" == Thomas E Dickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Thomas> byacc is portable, and has the advantage (in contrast to
> Thomas> bison) of being written in ANSI C.
>
> ... which is wri
On Thu, 25 Jul 2002, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
> >>> "mcmahill" == mcmahill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> mcmahill> Is there a way to turn off the inclusion of lex and
> mcmahill> yacc generated output in the distfile? I've seen
> mcmahill> some problems where yacc on one box generates c
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
On 22 Apr 2002, Akim Demaille wrote:
>
> | 1) I had a line like this in my configure.in:
> | test -f somefile.in && AC_OUTPUT(somefile)
>
> Err, I suppose you mean AC_CONFIG_FILES. Two AC_OUTPUT is not
> supported by Autoconf.
You ought to learn to phrase your sentences using accurate ter
On Wed, 23 May 2001, Axel Thimm wrote:
> > [...] may be there are some hints whether people have already tried with
> > borland compilers.
>
> Let's hope they are reading this list and will step forward to discuss it ;)
sure - Borland C is much faster, and checks for errors that gcc doesn't
both
On 21 Dec 2000, Tom Tromey wrote:
> > "Derek" == Derek R Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> creche. etags --version
> etags (GNU Emacs 20.5)
> Copyright (C) 1996 Free Software Foundation, Inc. and Ken Arnold
> This program is distributed under the same terms as Emacs
>
>
On 1 Nov 2000, Tom Tromey wrote:
> Pavel>
> Pavel> If you omit the space before the path, then 4.2BSD based systems
> Pavel> (such as Sequent DYNIX) will ignore the line, because they interpret
> Pavel> `#! /' as a 4-byte magic number.
> Pavel>
>
> Relia
On 17 Oct 2000, Akim Demaille wrote:
>
> | I am getting the foll. error message when I am trying to build
> | automake 1.4 on 11.00 hpux machine:
>
> You said it all: HPUX. Their Make is incredibly broken and is often
> responsible of build failures. I would *strongly* encourage you to
> inst
On Wed, 26 Jul 2000, Lars Hecking wrote:
>
> > > Here's the thing: This works fine on Linux. I only get the error on Solaris 7.
> > > I have all the latest GNU tools installed, and I'm installing the library in
> > > usr/local. I am not setting LD_LIBRARY_PATH, and I use the -L/usr/local/lib
> >
On 26 Jul 2000, Murray Cumming wrote:
> Here's the thing: This works fine on Linux. I only get the error on Solaris 7.
> I have all the latest GNU tools installed, and I'm installing the library in
> usr/local. I am not setting LD_LIBRARY_PATH, and I use the -L/usr/local/lib
> argument when linki
On Wed, 7 Jun 2000, Lars J. Aas wrote:
> We had some problems with getting our Coin project compiled on Cygwin,
> which we traced back to some "^M"-characters that weren't removed from
> directory- and file-names when the dependeny tracking files were about
> to be created at the end of the confi
21 matches
Mail list logo
