Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Wednesday 25 November 2009 13:43:34 Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Wednesday 25 November 2009 12:13:56 Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
I'm reluctant to use this code on every OS, as its not my code, and the
author might not like that, as this does no error checking. But it
would be good to implement it when atoll() is not in the library.
check out the gnulib project
Thank you Mike, I will do that. I assume that will provide an
implementation for atoll(). But is the rest of my logic ok?
while your logic looked ok, you dont need to worry about it with gnulib. not
only does it provide atoll replacements, but it takes care of the configure
tests and enabling it as needed as well. your source code shouldnt need to
change -- it can be written to assume atoll exists. it's a pretty badass
project.
-mike
A big problem is gnulib is GPL3 - I need to code to be GPL2, so I can not use
the library.
The second issue is that I am not totally convinced the person who wrote that
code would appreciate all the dependencies of gnublib.
I've suggested I convert his 'Configure' script to one which uses
autoconf/automake. I think simplicity is needed here. I can't see him objecting
to a few lines of C inserted, but the code in gnulib has various dependencies.
It also calls strtoll() which does not exist, so that too would have to be built.
The author of the code does not use autoconf/automake, but said he would my
changes as long as he could make changes easily. I'm a bit worried he might just
prefer his 'Configure' script anyway, which works well for him.
I would like to avoid having m4 macros, and anything else that makes it more
difficult for someone to understand.
_______________________________________________
Autoconf mailing list
Autoconf@xxxxxxx
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
