Re: failed tests AC_CHECK_LIB

[Brian Dessent]

Mat?j Tý? wrote:

> Anyway, don't you think that the usability of AC_CHECK_LIB in the
> current form (not allowing inclusion of headers nor the precise
> specification of the function call) is quite low because of this calling
> convention issue?

I agree that something with the functionality of AC_CHECK_FUNC_IN would
be more appropriate in autoconf proper as opposed to a third party
macro.  But I think such a macro should have the same semantics of
AC_CHECK_LIB, namely that it comes with a default action-if-true that
defines HAVE_LIBfoo and adds -lfoo to LIBS.

Brian