Eric Blake wrote:
> Can we add other known-good systems, like Cygwin? But that can be an
> incremental improvement in a later patch.
OK, done in the patch for Autoconf. The patch for gnulib is simpler now:
2012-05-03 Bruno Haible
*alloc-gnu, eealloc: Avoid "guessing no" when cross-c
Bruno Haible wrote:
> Jim Meyering wrote:
>> However, I would find the above code easier to read if it were
>> written on fewer lines:
>>
>> case "$host_os" in
>> *-gnu*) $1 ;; # Guess yes on glibc systems.
>> *) $2 ;; # If we don't know, assume the worst.
>> esac
>
> Will
Jim Meyering wrote:
> However, I would find the above code easier to read if it were
> written on fewer lines:
>
> case "$host_os" in
> *-gnu*) $1 ;; # Guess yes on glibc systems.
> *) $2 ;; # If we don't know, assume the worst.
> esac
Will it also work if $1 or $2 contai
Bruno Haible wrote:
> Configure outputs when cross-compiling:
>
> checking for GNU libc compatible malloc... no
> checking for GNU libc compatible realloc... no
>
> Here's a proposed patch for improving the guess for glibc targets.
> Again, the question is whether to modify the macro in Autocon
On 05/01/2012 03:41 PM, Bruno Haible wrote:
> Configure outputs when cross-compiling:
>
> checking for GNU libc compatible malloc... no
> checking for GNU libc compatible realloc... no
>
> Here's a proposed patch for improving the guess for glibc targets.
> Again, the question is whether to m
Configure outputs when cross-compiling:
checking for GNU libc compatible malloc... no
checking for GNU libc compatible realloc... no
Here's a proposed patch for improving the guess for glibc targets.
Again, the question is whether to modify the macro in Autoconf proper.
2012-05-01 Bruno Ha
