autoconf
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Releasing Autoconf 2.54


From: Arnaud Launay
Subject: Re: Releasing Autoconf 2.54
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 16:26:06 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.4i

Hi,

Le Wed, Sep 11, 2002 at 09:24:29AM +0200, Akim Demaille a écrit:
> > If you can give me 24 hours, I have some copy editing of
> > the Peter documentation in progress.
> Great :)  Thanks!

As I just told you, I found something wrong:

>From the doc:

AC_DEFINE (variable, [value], [description]) Macro
Define C preprocessor variable variable. If value is given, set
variable to that value (verbatim), otherwise set it to 1.


cassis:~$ cat configure.ac 
AC_INIT                                                                         
                                                                             
AC_CONFIG_HEADERS(config.h)                                                     
                                                                             
AC_DEFINE(HAVE_PTHREAD,,[Define if we use pthread.h.])
AC_OUTPUT

cassis:~$ autoheader --version
autoheader (GNU Autoconf) 2.53c

cassis:~$ autoheader
autoheader: `config.h.in' is created

cassis:~$ ./configure 
configure: creating ./config.status
config.status: creating config.h


cassis:~$ cat config.h
/* config.h.  Generated by configure.  */
/* config.h.in.  Generated from configure.ac by autoheader.  */

/* Define if we use pthread.h. */
#define HAVE_PTHREAD 

/* Define to the address where bug reports for this package
 * should be sent. */
#define PACKAGE_BUGREPORT ""



HAVE_PTHREAD is not defined as it should if I follow the doc...
Doc problem, or something else ? If we have to explicitly specify
the "1", it would be good to know... I mean, it works just fine
if I explicitly specify AC_DEFINE(HAVE_PTHREAD,1,[Define if we
use pthread.h.])... But lots of packages out there use the first.

So ?

        Arnaud.
-- 
Do not meddle in the affairs of sysadmins,
for they are quick to anger and have no need for subtlety.




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]