[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99
|
From: |
Paul Eggert |
|
Subject: |
Re: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99 |
|
Date: |
Fri, 30 Sep 2011 09:53:03 -0700 |
|
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.23) Gecko/20110922 Thunderbird/3.1.15 |
On 09/30/11 08:57, Andrew W. Nosenko wrote:
> Assuming that AC_PROG_CC_C99 is not available (e.g. doesn't exists and
> never existed), and only one macro is AC_PROG_CC_STDC, how I should to
> express that "c99 is required"? Or "c99 or better is required"?
Right now, you can't. That would need to be added, preferably
to Autoconf.
- Fwd: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Gary V. Vaughan, 2011/09/28
- Re: Fwd: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Paul Eggert, 2011/09/28
- Re: Fwd: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Bruno Haible, 2011/09/28
- Re: Fwd: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Paul Eggert, 2011/09/28
- Re: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Gary V. Vaughan, 2011/09/29
- Message not available
- Re: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Paul Eggert, 2011/09/29
- Re: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Bruno Haible, 2011/09/30
- Re: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Paul Eggert, 2011/09/30
- Re: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Andrew W. Nosenko, 2011/09/30
- Re: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99,
Paul Eggert <=