[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Sat, 29 Jul 2006 17:43:20 +0000
> The real problem that I was trying to illuminate is that the fact that
> if a particular
> interface was implemented as a macro then the AC_CHECK_FUNCS() breaks.
Most POSIX functions are required to exist as a linkable function, even
if they are also implemented as a macro. There are relatively few
exceptions on this front.
> Some seem to argue that one should always know if a particular interface
> be implemented as a macro (or compiler internal?). If so, then you have to
> roll your own autoconf macro. My point is that it would be more user
> if AC_CHECK_FUNCS (or a newly named AC macro) were to presume that if
> either you could link to the external name or if the external name were
> then you #define HAVE_INTERFACE.
It already exists - AC_CHECK_DECLS.
And for the weirdest of cases, the combination of AC_CHECK_DECLS
with AC_CHECK_FUNCS gives you the full check support for all four
declared and working
mistakenly declared but not implemented
linkable but undeclared
Re: AC_CHECK_FUNCS(sigsetjmp), Eric Blake, 2006/07/28
Eric Blake <=
- Re: AC_CHECK_FUNCS(sigsetjmp), (continued)