Re: AC_FUNC_SETVBUF_REVERSED in cross-compilation

[Paul D. Smith]

%% Earnie Boyd <address@hidden> writes:

  eb> Russ Allbery wrote:
  >> Paul D Smith <address@hidden> writes:
  >> 
  >> > I notice that the AC_FUNC_SETVBUF_REVERSED macro has no option for how
  >> > it behaves during cross-compilation.
  >> 
  >> Isn't this the macro about which there was general consensus here a
  >> while back that the likelihood of any system still existing with
  >> this problem (which was supposedly a bug in a particular software
  >> release that was later fixed) was so low as to not be worth
  >> worrying about?

In most packages that is probably the best solution.  However, maybe I'm
just stubborn, but I tend to be a little more conservative with GNU make
(it still compiles with K&R compilers even!) because it's an integral
part of the bootstrap chain.

However, probably within a few years I'll be willing to let go of these
really old systems even in GNU make--they can always use an older
version to bootsrap, after all :).

  eb> Well, I was about to ask for a list of which systems are broken
  eb> and suggest that a better solution would be to make the value
  eb> hardcoded based on a filter of that list rather than trying to
  eb> determine it via executable testing.

Hm, not a bad idea.  The comments say this was a problem on "System V
before release 3".  Unfortunately I have no idea how to test that based
on the system type.

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Paul D. Smith <address@hidden>          Find some GNU make tips at:
 http://www.gnu.org                      http://www.paulandlesley.org/gmake/
 "Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist