Mat?j Tý? wrote: > Anyway, don't you think that the usability of AC_CHECK_LIB in the > current form (not allowing inclusion of headers nor the precise > specification of the function call) is quite low because of this calling > convention issue? I agree that something with the functionality of AC_CHECK_FUNC_IN would be more appropriate in autoconf proper as opposed to a third party macro. But I think such a macro should have the same semantics of AC_CHECK_LIB, namely that it comes with a default action-if-true that defines HAVE_LIBfoo and adds -lfoo to LIBS. Brian _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
