Re: Autoconf check for XML support?

[Federico Montesino Pouzols]

        I have just checked that the incremental code in the stable
branch, does it fail somehow?

        As for the check for xml, COMMON_XML_PARSING is defined in
cc++/config.h if xml support is built in.

On Sat, Dec 07, 2002 at 02:20:49PM -0500, David Sugar wrote:
> I thought the incremental XML parsing patch had made it into the current
> distributions.  Let me review that.  The cc++/config.h file provides
> compile time info on if xml support was built.  Perhaps you can create a
> simple macro which examines it.  I think having a OST_CCXX2_XML check 
> might be a useful addition to ost_check2.m4.
> 
> On Sat, 7 Dec 2002, Ari Johnson wrote:
> 
> > 
> > I see that there is an OST_CCXX2_DYNLOADER check among the autoconf macros
> > defined by ost_check2.m4, but no such way to determine if XML support is
> > built in.  I'm at the point in my project where I need to make the
> > decision to move to a more portable autoconf/automake build environment,
> > and that means that I'll need my configure script to check for an
> > appropriate version of CommonC++ as well as for built-in XML support.
> > As to incremental XML parsing, I'll just have to assume that people use
> > the CVS version until an incremented release number exists for the next
> > release, when I do OST_CCXX2_VERSION.
> > 
> > Would it overclutter things to include an OST_CCXX2_XML check, or is there
> > perhaps a better way to accomplish this?  Thanks.
> > 
> > Ari Johnson
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bug-commoncpp mailing list
> > address@hidden
> > http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-commoncpp
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Bug-commoncpp mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-commoncpp