On Sun, 2009-05-03 at 01:43 +0200, Michael Bruck wrote:
> On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 1:03 AM, Zach Welch wrote:
> > On Sun, 2009-05-03 at 00:40 +0200, Michael Schwingen wrote:
> >> Zach Welch wrote:
> >> > If the header is required, the configure step should fail when it is not
> >> > found in the sys
On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 1:03 AM, Zach Welch wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-05-03 at 00:40 +0200, Michael Schwingen wrote:
>> Zach Welch wrote:
>> > If the header is required, the configure step should fail when it is not
>> > found in the system. The rule is to fail as early as possible.
>> >
>> > Which he
On Sun, 2009-05-03 at 00:40 +0200, Michael Schwingen wrote:
> Zach Welch wrote:
> > If the header is required, the configure step should fail when it is not
> > found in the system. The rule is to fail as early as possible.
> >
> > Which headers?
> >
> Not system headers - I was thinking about
Zach Welch wrote:
> If the header is required, the configure step should fail when it is not
> found in the system. The rule is to fail as early as possible.
>
> Which headers?
>
Not system headers - I was thinking about in-project headers (either
user-edited, config.h or similar) that define s
On Sat, 2009-05-02 at 12:26 +0200, Michael Schwingen wrote:
> Zach Welch wrote:
> > With autotools, #ifdef should be preferred. For example, HAVE_FOO_H
> > will be defined 1 by the AC_CHECK_HEADERS([foo.h],[1],[Comment]) macro;
> > configure defines the symbol to the given value if foo.h is prese
On Sat, May 2, 2009 at 12:26 PM, Michael Schwingen
wrote:
> Zach Welch wrote:
>> With autotools, #ifdef should be preferred. For example, HAVE_FOO_H
>> will be defined 1 by the AC_CHECK_HEADERS([foo.h],[1],[Comment]) macro;
>> configure defines the symbol to the given value if foo.h is present,
Zach Welch wrote:
> With autotools, #ifdef should be preferred. For example, HAVE_FOO_H
> will be defined 1 by the AC_CHECK_HEADERS([foo.h],[1],[Comment]) macro;
> configure defines the symbol to the given value if foo.h is present, and
> the symbol is not defined if absent. In both cases, the d
On Sat, 2009-05-02 at 07:04 +0200, Michael Bruck wrote:
> I would like to start another holy war while we are at it:
>
>
> 1. Are false preprocessor variables in OpenOCD specified by not
> defining a variable or by defining it as 0 ?
OpenOCD's variables are defined as 0 or 1. This is not standa
I would like to start another holy war while we are at it:
1. Are false preprocessor variables in OpenOCD specified by not
defining a variable or by defining it as 0 ?
2. config.h generated by autotools and cmake use different paradigms for this
3. several files (including my latest patch for j
