[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: AC_DECL_SYS_SIGLIST is broken in latest autoconf
From: |
Mike Castle |
Subject: |
Re: AC_DECL_SYS_SIGLIST is broken in latest autoconf |
Date: |
Tue, 29 Apr 2003 16:57:05 -0700 |
In article <address@hidden>,
Ben Pfaff <address@hidden> wrote:
>address@hidden (Mike Castle) writes:
>> But then it's not the same as AC_CHECK_DECL([sys_siglist]),
>
>Why should it be the same as AC_CHECK_DECL([sys_siglist])? It is
>specialized for sys_siglist, so it should do what is necessary.
Then include a patch to update the docs as well?
>> and it's listed as an obsolete macro anyway.
>
>So what? If you're going to support an obsolete macro at all
>then why not support it right?
To discourage people from using it?
It looks like this macro was the only one simplified. Others may be broken
as well.
>> >--- autoconf-2.57.orig/lib/autoconf/specific.m4
>> >+++ autoconf-2.57/lib/autoconf/specific.m4
>> >@@ -60,7 +60,12 @@
>> > # -------------------
>> > AN_IDENTIFIER([sys_siglist], [AC_CHECK_DECLS([sys_siglist])])
>> > AU_DEFUN([AC_DECL_SYS_SIGLIST],
>> >-[AC_CHECK_DECLS([sys_siglist])
>> >+[AC_CHECK_DECLS([sys_siglist],,,[
>> >+#include <signal.h>
>>
>> I wrap the #include in #ifdef HAVE_SIGNAL_H myself.
>
>Sounds like a good idea.
Hmmm. 2.13 also included sys/types.h. Is that necessary on any systems?
(If so, need to update my usage).
Odd. coreutils just uses plain sys_siglist with no special headers.
Wonder if it actually works.
Time to catch the train now though.
Cheers,
mrc
--
Mike Castle address@hidden www.netcom.com/~dalgoda/
We are all of us living in the shadow of Manhattan. -- Watchmen
fatal ("You are in a maze of twisty compiler features, all different"); -- gcc