Hi Tomaz(,
Tomaz( Slivnik wrote:
> I just tried compiling autogen 5.8.7 on Mac OS X 10.4.8.
>
> During ``configure'' I receive the following output:
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> configure: WARNING: wchar.h: present but cannot be compiled
> configure: WARNING: wchar.h: check for missing prerequisite headers?
> configure: WARNING: wchar.h: see the Autoconf documentation
> configure: WARNING: wchar.h: section "Present But Cannot Be Compiled"
> configure: WARNING: wchar.h: proceeding with the preprocessor's result
> configure: WARNING: wchar.h: in the future, the compiler will take precedence
> configure: WARNING: ## -------------------------------------------------- ##
> configure: WARNING: ## Report this to autogen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ##
> configure: WARNING: ## -------------------------------------------------- ##
This is caused by the snprintfv.m4 file checking for wchar.h
without doing it "the right way." I've now read through the
"Present But Cannot Be Compiled" section, but it leaves no clue
about what should be done. I am going to take a wild guess that
I replace this line from snprintfv.m4:
AC_CHECK_HEADER(wchar.h)
with this:
AC_CHECK_HEADER([wchar.h], [], [],
[[#if HAVE_WCHAR_H
# include <wchar.h>
#endif
]])
That's what I got from reading that section, but:
* it seems really weird to me
* it seems to be contradicted elsewhere:
> This scheme, which improves the robustness of the test, also requires
> that you make sure that headers that must be included before the
> HEADER-FILE be part of the INCLUDES, (*note Default Includes::). If
> looking for `bar.h', which requires that `foo.h' be included before if
> it exists, we suggest the following scheme:
>
>
> AC_CHECK_HEADERS([foo.h])
> AC_CHECK_HEADERS([bar.h], [], [],
> [#if HAVE_FOO_H
> # include <foo.h>
> # endif
> ])
Since reasonably modern system headers should be self-sufficient
(you should 'a been there in the seventies and eighties!!),
I really cannot imagine what prerequisite your "wchar.h" header
needs.
I leave the rest of this part of the discussion to autoconf experts,
and I'll cover the other two issues under separate cover.
Thanks again for your report.
Regards, Bruce
_______________________________________________
Autoconf mailing list
Autoconf@xxxxxxx
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
