On Oct 31, 2008, at 10:14 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
No warning that, since the aim was to move away from the old
semantics
to the new semantics, using `-' gets the user stuck with the old
semantics which means he will put stones in the way of the intended
move?
Jeff, which solution did you use for your particular problem? I'm
reading
between the lines and assuming that you ended up passing something
besides
[] or [-], because you wanted a compiler check (which rejects the
header
as incompatible with your usage patterns) and not a preprocessor check
(which accepts the header as present).
I used [AC_INCLUDES_DEFAULT]. This gave me:
- no warning
- use the compiler check
- test came back "no"
- hence HAVE_<foo>_H was not set
Which is exactly what I wanted.
--
Jeff Squyres
Cisco Systems
_______________________________________________
Autoconf mailing list
Autoconf@xxxxxxx
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
