[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: regression in autoconf-2.62 vs. 2.61
From: |
Eric Blake |
Subject: |
Re: regression in autoconf-2.62 vs. 2.61 |
Date: |
Tue, 17 Jun 2008 21:20:52 -0600 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.14) Gecko/20080421 Thunderbird/2.0.0.14 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
According to Stepan Kasal on 6/5/2008 10:28 AM:
| Hello,
Hi Stepan, Ralf,
|
| I'd like to propose a solution, please speak up if you are not
| satisfied with it. (If we reach an agreement, I'm willing to prepare
| a patch later.)
Well, now that Ralf has patched the code to strip comments after #undef
lines in the template file, we really ought to tighten the documentation.
~ Any volunteers?
|
| First, let me state that, strictly speaking, this is not a
| regression. The Autoconf manual says that the #undef line cannot
| contain anything after the symbol. And in that case, all versions
| tested by Ralf do the same.
|
|
| I suggest to add a note to the manual along these lines:
|
| ``
| Generally speaking, all #define and #undef directives in the header
| template may be modified by config.status, under some circumstances.
| Consequently, if you need to define or undefine a symbol under some
| circumstances (#ifdef THIS #define THAT, etc.), you should place
| those directives outside the config headers. If you absolutely need
| to hook that to the config header itself, please put these directives
| to a separate file, and #include it from the config header template.
| (If you are using autoheader, you would probably use AH_TOP or
| AH_BOTTOM to inject the #include directive.
|
| For certain symbold it is important to avoid #undef ... [explanation
| about _POSIX_WHATEVER].
| To achive this, current Autoconf comments out _all_ remaining #undef
| directives remaining in the config header at the end of the
| instatiation, but this may change in future releases.
| ''
|
| WDYT?
Looks like a reasonable start, but be careful for typos (such as symbold).
~ I'll gladly review a texinfo-markup version, if I don't get around to
writing one first.
- --
Don't work too hard, make some time for fun as well!
Eric Blake address@hidden
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Public key at home.comcast.net/~ericblake/eblake.gpg
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iEYEARECAAYFAkhYfxQACgkQ84KuGfSFAYD07QCgnoNA+RKqDnIIhTy1QC6qq5bA
3GUAnj7+b0ccAww0vTnnmGx5ESBcI53d
=Xrl5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- regression in autoconf-2.62 vs. 2.61, Karsten Hopp, 2008/06/04
- Re: regression in autoconf-2.62 vs. 2.61, Ralf Wildenhues, 2008/06/04
- Re: regression in autoconf-2.62 vs. 2.61, Eric Blake, 2008/06/04
- Re: regression in autoconf-2.62 vs. 2.61, Ralf Wildenhues, 2008/06/04
- Re: regression in autoconf-2.62 vs. 2.61, Stepan Kasal, 2008/06/05
- Re: regression in autoconf-2.62 vs. 2.61, Eric Blake, 2008/06/05
- Re: regression in autoconf-2.62 vs. 2.61, Ralf Wildenhues, 2008/06/16
- Re: regression in autoconf-2.62 vs. 2.61, Eric Blake, 2008/06/16
- Re: regression in autoconf-2.62 vs. 2.61,
Eric Blake <=
- Re: regression in autoconf-2.62 vs. 2.61, Stepan Kasal, 2008/06/18
- Re: regression in autoconf-2.62 vs. 2.61, Ralf Wildenhues, 2008/06/18
- Re: regression in autoconf-2.62 vs. 2.61, Stepan Kasal, 2008/06/18
- Re: regression in autoconf-2.62 vs. 2.61, Ralf Wildenhues, 2008/06/19