[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Nano-devel] useless include ?

From: David Lawrence Ramsey
Subject: Re: [Nano-devel] useless include ?
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2004 17:03:22 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040523i

--- Mike Frysinger <address@hidden> wrote:
>On Thursday 02 September 2004 10:04 am, David Lawrence Ramsey wrote:
>> That's good.  I haven't actually seen any failures; I'm just a bit 
>> paranoid about breaking the build.  In any case, @includedir@ has now 
>> been removed in CVS.  The attached patch is a backport of it to 
>> 1.3.4.
>thanks :) while we're on the subject, would you consider defining the 
>4th parameter in each of the AC_TRY_RUN() macro's ?  right now they all 
>define the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd parameters, but not the 4th ... it would 
>make cross compiling nano a non-issue then :)

I've done it for the first one (the broken regexec() check) in the 
attached patch.  I'm assuming "no" because as far as I know, the bug 
appears to only be in glibc 2.2.3, so just make sure you're not using 
that on the system you're building for.

I've looked at the others, though, and it appears that there are already 
warnings about trying to use slang when cross-compiling as the fourth 
parameter in the next AC_TRY_RUN().  Do they handle things properly, or 
not?  I only ask because there are AC_TRY_RUN()s within AC_TRY_RUN()s 
there, and I'm not entirely sure how it all works when only the 
outermost one has a warning.

Attachment: nanocross.patch
Description: Text document

reply via email to

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