[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: preparation for expand-before-require warning
From: |
Ralf Wildenhues |
Subject: |
Re: preparation for expand-before-require warning |
Date: |
Wed, 21 Jan 2009 19:30:43 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) |
Hi Eric,
* Eric Blake wrote on Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 05:32:21PM CET:
> Here's what I'm pushing. I took the liberty in adding a FAQ node to the
> manual, since I'm sure that we will start getting questions about the new
> warning.
> address@hidden expanded before required
> +Older versions of Autoconf silently built files with incorrect ordering
> +between dependent macros if an outer macro first expanded, then later
> +indirectly required, an inner macro. Starting with Autoconf 2.64, this
> +situation no longer generates out-of-order code, but results in
> +duplicate output and a diagnosis of a syntax warning:
Libtool uses an idiom that is now warned about. For example, in
libltdl/m4/libtool.m4, it warns about
m4_defun([_LT_PROG_CXX],
[
pushdef([AC_MSG_ERROR], [_lt_caught_CXX_error=yes])
AC_PROG_CXX
if test -n "$CXX" && ( test "X$CXX" != "Xno" &&
( (test "X$CXX" = "Xg++" && `g++ -v >/dev/null 2>&1` ) ||
(test "X$CXX" != "Xg++"))) ; then
AC_PROG_CXXCPP
else
_lt_caught_CXX_error=yes
fi
popdef([AC_MSG_ERROR])
])# _LT_PROG_CXX
The Autoconf macro AC_PROG_CXXCPP requires AC_PROG_CXX. The pushdef
exists to avoid AC_PROG_CXX from stopping the configure script when no
C++ compiler can be found.
I fail to see so far why this should be a bug to be fixed in Libtool.
Also, please note that this code should remain compatible to older
Autoconf versions for some time.
Thanks,
Ralf
- preparation for expand-before-require warning, Eric Blake, 2009/01/20
- Re: preparation for expand-before-require warning, Eric Blake, 2009/01/20
- Re: preparation for expand-before-require warning, Paolo Bonzini, 2009/01/21
- Re: preparation for expand-before-require warning, Eric Blake, 2009/01/21
- Re: preparation for expand-before-require warning, Paolo Bonzini, 2009/01/21
- Re: preparation for expand-before-require warning, Eric Blake, 2009/01/21
- Re: preparation for expand-before-require warning,
Ralf Wildenhues <=
- Re: preparation for expand-before-require warning, Eric Blake, 2009/01/21
- Re: preparation for expand-before-require warning, Eric Blake, 2009/01/21
- Re: preparation for expand-before-require warning, Eric Blake, 2009/01/22
Re: preparation for expand-before-require warning, Paolo Bonzini, 2009/01/23