plied as follows.
2017-12-05 Sam Steingold
Bruno Haible
no-c++: Avoid "egrep: repetition-operator operand invalid" error.
* m4/no-c++.m4 (gt_NO_CXX): Don't use '+' characters nor spaces in the
AC_EGREP_CPP pattern.
diff --git
bject: [PATCH] Avoid the "egrep: repetition-operator operand invalid" error
on Darwin
---
m4/no-c++.m4 | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/m4/no-c++.m4 b/m4/no-c++.m4
index ed06b22b6..b2fa0184f 100644
--- a/m4/no-c++.m4
+++ b/m4/no-c++.m4
@@ -7,
Paolo Bonzini writes:
>> Is there a wide class of projects or operating systems that recommends
>> or suggests use of CC=c++ that I've missed? I'm trying to understand
>> the origins of the CC=c++ notion. Learning that may help me understand
>> the bigger picture.
>
> For example, when a projec
Is there a wide class of projects or operating systems that recommends
or suggests use of CC=c++ that I've missed? I'm trying to understand
the origins of the CC=c++ notion. Learning that may help me understand
the bigger picture.
For example, when a project is considering switching from C t
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 10:12 AM, Simon Josefsson wrote:
> Sam Steingold writes:
>
>> Some packages are compilable with both C (production) and C++ (extra
>> compilation time type checking and run-time verification for
>> debugging).
>> when such a package uses code from gnulib, it wants to compil
Sam Steingold writes:
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 6:28 AM, Simon Josefsson wrote:
>> Bruno Haible writes:
>>
>>> Should the 'regex' module (and possibly other modules which require C
>>> syntax) depend on the 'no-c++' module? We can open a p
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 6:28 AM, Simon Josefsson wrote:
> Bruno Haible writes:
>
>> Should the 'regex' module (and possibly other modules which require C
>> syntax) depend on the 'no-c++' module? We can open a poll on it.
>
> I don't understa
Bruno Haible writes:
> Should the 'regex' module (and possibly other modules which require C
> syntax) depend on the 'no-c++' module? We can open a poll on it.
I don't understand the rationale for the no-c++ module, let alone making
any other modules depend
Sam Steingold wrote in
<http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnulib/2009-08/msg00112.html>:
> my suggestion eliminates two expensive steps:
>
> now:
>
> import the non-C++ module
> regenerate all autoconf files
> try to compile with c++, fail
> import no-c++
&
> * Bruno Haible [2009-08-08 11:47:01 +0200]:
>
> Sam Steingold wrote:
>> modules which cannot be compiled with c++ (regex, gettimeofday) should depend
>> on no-c++
>
> This cannot be implemented as you wish. The ability to compile in C mode when
> CC="g++"
Sam Steingold wrote:
> modules which cannot be compiled with c++ (regex, gettimeofday) should depend
> on no-c++
This cannot be implemented as you wish. The ability to compile in C mode when
CC="g++" is done through a variable NO_CXX that has to be added to the compiler
flag
modules which cannot be compiled with c++ (regex, gettimeofday) should depend
on no-c++
I added this module now.
> === modules/no-c++ ===
> Description:
> Support for compiling in C mode when CC is set to a C++ compiler.
>
> Files:
> m4/no-c++.m4
>
> Depends-on:
>
> configure.ac:
> gt_NO_C
Paul Eggert wrote:
> for it to be useful won't we
> also need to sprinkle $(NO_CXX) throughout the descriptions of all
> modules that are not compilable with g++?
Yes. This is easy to do. I imagine Simon's buildbot will give us the list
of modules for which it is necessary.
So far, I put each suc
Bruno Haible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Objections?
I have no objections to this module, but for it to be useful won't we
also need to sprinkle $(NO_CXX) throughout the descriptions of all
modules that are not compilable with g++? How would that work?
such modules in automake "convenience libraries"
and compile them with a C compiler, even if $CC is set to a C++ compiler.
So far only "CC=g++" is supported, but that's sufficient since g++ implements
ANSI C++ fairly decently.
Objections?
Bruno
======
16 matches
Mail list logo
