[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: 2 questions

From: Scott James Remnant
Subject: Re: 2 questions
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2004 20:10:53 +0100

On Fri, 2004-07-09 at 14:29 -0400, Wil Turner wrote:

> I must be doing (or not doing) something else, because I am already 
> using libtool 1.5.6 and experiencing these 2 problems.
You will experience the first, the next *major* release of Libtool (1.6)
will fix them.

> I grep'd around a bit and found that my aclocal.m4 file (generated 
> automatically by aclocal) has the following section:
> dnl And a similar setup for Fortran 77 support
>      [AC_LIBTOOL_F77],
>      [define([AC_PROG_F77], defn([AC_PROG_F77])[AC_LIBTOOL_F77
> ])])
> Is this the source of the checks for the fortran compiler and any ideas 
> on why aclocal is putting it there?
Ish... the code was intended to check whether the user had expanded
AC_PROG_F77 in their, if so configure Fortran support and
if not hook the definition of AC_PROG_F77 to configure Fortran support
if it were expanded later in the file.

The bug was that the code when checking for configure arguments expanded
AC_PROG_F77 anyway, so this code always thought the user wanted Fortran

See HEAD for a better way of doing things.

Have you ever, ever felt like this?
Had strange things happen?  Are you going round the twist?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]