[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: AS_CASE vs case/esac
From: |
Ralf Wildenhues |
Subject: |
Re: AS_CASE vs case/esac |
Date: |
Fri, 14 Mar 2008 00:41:32 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14) |
* NightStrike wrote on Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 12:29:41AM CET:
> On 3/13/08, Ralf Wildenhues <address@hidden> wrote:
> > Please let this be productive and name them, so that can be fixed.
> > Thanks.
>
> Wouldn't it be easier to write a script that compares the list of
> obsolete macros in the autoconf manual with the macros that autoscan
> handles?
I think you are looking at a different manual version than your autoscan
version. At least the current autoscan recommends none of these macros
any more AFAICS, and at a glance I could not find any others either.
> Also, the macro AC_TYPE_SIGNAL comes up in the library checking
> section, not the type checking section.
Hmm, that looks like a bug...
Cheers,
Ralf
- AS_CASE vs case/esac, NightStrike, 2008/03/13
- Re: AS_CASE vs case/esac, Ralf Wildenhues, 2008/03/13
- Re: AS_CASE vs case/esac, NightStrike, 2008/03/13
- Re: AS_CASE vs case/esac, Ralf Wildenhues, 2008/03/13
- Re: AS_CASE vs case/esac, NightStrike, 2008/03/13
- Re: AS_CASE vs case/esac, Ralf Wildenhues, 2008/03/13
- Re: AS_CASE vs case/esac, NightStrike, 2008/03/13
- Re: AS_CASE vs case/esac, Ralf Wildenhues, 2008/03/13
- Re: AS_CASE vs case/esac, NightStrike, 2008/03/13
- Re: AS_CASE vs case/esac,
Ralf Wildenhues <=
- Re: AS_CASE vs case/esac, NightStrike, 2008/03/13
- Re: AS_CASE vs case/esac, Ralf Wildenhues, 2008/03/13
- Re: AS_CASE vs case/esac, Ralf Wildenhues, 2008/03/13