Re: what happened to HAVE_STDBOOL_H

2011-05-03 Thread Eric Blake
On 05/03/2011 04:34 PM, Sam Steingold wrote: >> is not required by C89. However, nothing else in gnulib >> used the results of the test, and the idea is that if you are using >> gnulib's stdbool module, you don't care about a fully >> standards-compliant , rather you care about the subset of >>

Re: what happened to HAVE_STDBOOL_H

2011-05-03 Thread Sam Steingold
> * Eric Blake [2011-05-03 16:03:16 -0600]: > > On 05/03/2011 03:52 PM, Sam Steingold wrote: >> when I regenerate config.h with the current gnulib, I get: >> >> @@ -871,12 +979,6 @@ >> /* `struct sockaddr_un' from has a `sun_len' field */ >> #undef HAVE_SOCKADDR_UN_LEN >> >> -/* Define to 1

Re: what happened to HAVE_STDBOOL_H

2011-05-03 Thread Eric Blake
On 05/03/2011 03:52 PM, Sam Steingold wrote: > when I regenerate config.h with the current gnulib, I get: > > @@ -871,12 +979,6 @@ > /* `struct sockaddr_un' from has a `sun_len' field */ > #undef HAVE_SOCKADDR_UN_LEN > > -/* Define to 1 if stdbool.h conforms to C99. */ > -#undef HAVE_STDBOOL_

what happened to HAVE_STDBOOL_H

2011-05-03 Thread Sam Steingold
when I regenerate config.h with the current gnulib, I get: @@ -871,12 +979,6 @@ /* `struct sockaddr_un' from has a `sun_len' field */ #undef HAVE_SOCKADDR_UN_LEN -/* Define to 1 if stdbool.h conforms to C99. */ -#undef HAVE_STDBOOL_H - -/* Define to 1 if you have the header file. */ -#undef