> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Paolo Bonzini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bruno Haible wrote:
> > Daiki Ueno wrote:
> >
> >> When I tried a tiny program which uses gnulib's poll(2) emulation on
> >> MacOS X 10.4, I found a bug. gnulib's poll(2) uses recv(2) with
> >> MSG_PEEK to support POL
Bruno Haible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jim Meyering wrote:
>> > 2) For the user who needs to fix a compilation problem, or do minor
>> >developments in a package.
>> >
>> >In this case I _do_ want to change the Makefile or config.h, to see
>> >the results. Because if I change Makefil
Paul Eggert wrote:
> Since nobody needs
> HAVE_CONFIG_H any more, I installed the following change into gnulib.
I did the same for these files.
2006-09-14 Bruno Haible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* lib/allocsa.c: Include unconditionally.
* lib/asnprintf.c: Likewise.
* lib/aspr
Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * Paul Eggert wrote on Thu, Sep 14, 2006 at 12:41:51AM CEST:
>> Since nobody needs HAVE_CONFIG_H any more, [...]
>
> What makes you reach this conclusion (for third-party packages, not for
> some well-maintained GNU packages)?
I did a Google search "D
Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm surprised that the compromise of adding advisory comments rubs
> you (Bruno) so hard the wrong way. Does anyone else object to
> adding both lines?
I'm afraid I'm mildly annoyed by them too. I use Emacs with (setq
enable-local-variables 0), so I ge
Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> I'm surprised that the compromise of adding advisory comments rubs
>> you (Bruno) so hard the wrong way. Does anyone else object to
>> adding both lines?
>
> I'm afraid I'm mildly annoyed by them too. I use Ema
Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> aren't the warning and possible annoyance at least a little more
> appropriate for the build-generated files whose rules I was proposing
> to change in gnulib?
I suppose so, yes.
Isn't this a generic problem that has been around for years?
For example,
