[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Fwd: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99
From: |
Paul Eggert |
Subject: |
Re: Fwd: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99 |
Date: |
Wed, 28 Sep 2011 07:56:34 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.21) Gecko/20110831 Thunderbird/3.1.13 |
On 09/28/11 01:52, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
> Might as well try to fix it right in gnulib though, and maybe in autoconf
>> too if the latest release hasn't made it multi-call safe yet.
The simplest fix would be something like the patch at the end of
this message. This matches common practice anyway; and if an
application mistakenly omits the AC_PROG_CC_STDC there
shouldn't be much of a problem in practice I expect.
Another possibility would be for gnulib to redefine
AC_PROG_CC_STDC so that it acts only once. That'd be more work,
though.
We could also look into fixing autoconf, but that would take longer
and be trickier. I briefly discussed this a few days ago, when
talking about the declaration-after-statement issue
<http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnulib/2011-09/msg00367.html>.
diff --git a/modules/stdarg b/modules/stdarg
index 84d3e7b..ab3436e 100644
--- a/modules/stdarg
+++ b/modules/stdarg
@@ -13,7 +13,9 @@ dnl Some compilers (e.g., AIX 5.3 cc) need to be in c99 mode
dnl for the builtin va_copy to work. With Autoconf 2.60 or later,
dnl AC_PROG_CC_STDC arranges for this. With older Autoconf AC_PROG_CC_STDC
dnl shouldn't hurt, though installers are on their own to set c99 mode.
-AC_REQUIRE([AC_PROG_CC_STDC])
+dnl
+dnl It is the package's responsibility to invoke AC_PROG_CC_STDC early on,
+dnl before gl_EARLY.
configure.ac:
gl_STDARG_H
- Fwd: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Gary V. Vaughan, 2011/09/28
- Re: Fwd: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99,
Paul Eggert <=
- Re: Fwd: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Bruno Haible, 2011/09/28
- Re: Fwd: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Paul Eggert, 2011/09/28
- Re: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Gary V. Vaughan, 2011/09/29
- Re: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Bruno Haible, 2011/09/29
- Re: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Paul Eggert, 2011/09/29
- Re: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Bruno Haible, 2011/09/30
- Re: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Paul Eggert, 2011/09/30
- Re: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Andrew W. Nosenko, 2011/09/30
- Re: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Paul Eggert, 2011/09/30
- Re: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Gary V. Vaughan, 2011/09/29