Re: Appending to config.log

[Mark D. Roth]

On Mon May 20 12:01 2002 +0200, Akim Demaille wrote:
> Your need is very legitimate!  The main problem is that the behavior
> of one such macro is very unclear, especially because there are
> several possible evaluation schemes of the COMMANDS (e.g., the
> compiling macros need the COMMANDS to be evaluated twice, since they
> contain shell variables that must be expanded.
> 
> I'm going to try to clear this part in Autoconf, and to provide a
> definitive interface.
> 
> As far as config.log is concerned, there was not enough demand for
> such a macro: having config.log filled as a side-effect of some main
> command (such as AC_RUN_COMMAND) has always been proved sufficient.
> Since I'm willing to keep the interface as small as possible, it has
> never been provided.
> 
> If AC_RUN_COMMAND or similar fulfils, your needs, would that be
> enough, or would you still need some form of AC_MSG_LOG?

For what I'm currently trying to do, having an AC_RUN_COMMAND macro
would solve the problem.  However, as you note, there are several
different permutations of AC_RUN_COMMAND that might be useful, and it
might be difficult to support all of them.

If I had to choose between the two macros, I'd rather have an
AC_LOG_MSG macro, because that's the part that I'm currently lacking
an interface for.  If I have AC_LOG_MSG, I can roll my own
AC_RUN_COMMAND, but without AC_LOG_MSG, I have no supported interface
for logging to config.log.

Thanks for the response!

-- 
Mark D. Roth <address@hidden>
http://www.feep.net/~roth/