> hi：
> I have a configure.ac file includes: AC_CHECK_LIB([m], [ceil])
> then I got this result: checking for ceil in -lm... no
> but a .c file contains ceil function works very well with or without -lm,
> why is that?
>
> libtool version: 2.4.2
> system： Ubuntu 13.04
Most likely cleil is no fu
> hi：
> I have a configure.ac file includes: AC_CHECK_LIB([m], [ceil])
> then I got this result: checking for ceil in -lm... no
> but a .c file contains ceil function works very well with or without -lm,
> why is that?
>
> libtool version: 2.4.2
> system： Ubuntu 13.04
Most likely cleil is no fu
> hi：
> I have a configure.ac file includes: AC_CHECK_LIB([m], [ceil])
> then I got this result: checking for ceil in -lm... no
> but a .c file contains ceil function works very well with or without -lm,
> why is that?
>
> libtool version: 2.4.2
> system： Ubuntu 13.04
Most likely cleil is no fu
Actually it makes not much sense to ask about why autoconf a/o libtool does
this or that, as the tools themselves are coded beyond understanding or
readability. They just do on some systems what they are expected to do.
Of course AC_CHECK_LIB([m],[main]), shouldn't return true as main is no memb
I've changed AC_CHECK_LIB([m], [ceil]) to AC_CHECK_LIB([m], [main]) and it
works. according to conftest.c, libtool generate a small peace of code to
check whether the specific function exists or not. for AC_CHECK_LIB([m],
[main]), the code is:
main()
{
return main();
;
return 0;
}
call
> hi：
> I have a configure.ac file includes: AC_CHECK_LIB([m], [ceil])
> then I got this result: checking for ceil in -lm... no
> but a .c file contains ceil function works very well with or without -lm,
> why is that?
>
> libtool version: 2.4.2
> system： Ubuntu 13.04
Most likely cleil is no fu
hi：
I have a configure.ac file includes: AC_CHECK_LIB([m], [ceil])
then I got this result: checking for ceil in -lm... no
but a .c file contains ceil function works very well with or without -lm,
why is that?
libtool version: 2.4.2
system： Ubuntu 13.04
___
