[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: AC_SUBST and AC_CACHE_VAL
From: |
Stefan Bienert |
Subject: |
Re: AC_SUBST and AC_CACHE_VAL |
Date: |
Wed, 13 May 2009 22:33:06 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090510) |
Hi Ralf,
> What does the last line have to do with the ones before that?
Oh, I forgot to mention: I have this stuff in a macro. It's meant to
check for certain flags and if accepted by the program, the flag is
added to the flag-list. Now I have another macro, which invokes the flag
checks by AC_REQUIRE... If someone invokes the macro at another place,
with the AC_SUBST in the end, the concatenation happens.
> If an initial value of SB_FOOS from the user (./configure SB_FOOS=...)
> is to be honored, then maybe you should just check for presence of bar
> before adding it?
> case " $SB_FOOS " in
> *\ bar\ *) ;;
> *) SB_FOOS="$SB_FOOS bar";;
> esac
Never thought of that before! Many thanks, I will check my setups where
this applies. Tres cool, I would say! But why is nobody using AS_CASE?
> If the user is not involved here, then how come you save and restore
> SB_FOOS but not initialize it early in configure?
Isn't SB_FOOS empty if not initialised?
greetings,
Stefan
- AC_SUBST and AC_CACHE_VAL, Stefan Bienert, 2009/05/12
- Re: AC_SUBST and AC_CACHE_VAL, Ralf Wildenhues, 2009/05/13
- Re: AC_SUBST and AC_CACHE_VAL,
Stefan Bienert <=
- Re: AC_SUBST and AC_CACHE_VAL, Ralf Wildenhues, 2009/05/13
- Re: AC_SUBST and AC_CACHE_VAL, Stefan Bienert, 2009/05/13
- Re: AC_SUBST and AC_CACHE_VAL, Ralf Wildenhues, 2009/05/13
- Re: AC_SUBST and AC_CACHE_VAL, Stefan Bienert, 2009/05/13
- Re: AC_SUBST and AC_CACHE_VAL, Ralf Wildenhues, 2009/05/14
- Message not available
- Re: AC_SUBST and AC_CACHE_VAL, Ralf Wildenhues, 2009/05/15
- Re: AC_SUBST and AC_CACHE_VAL, Eric Blake, 2009/05/13