> From: Eric Blake <eblake@xxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 16:16:46 +0100 > On 03/19/2012 09:05 AM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > >>> if false; then > >>> AC_CONFIG_SUBDIRS([test/installtest]) > >>> fi > > Any expansion of this macro that is executed in place will be skipped at > configure time; (As intended.) > but some macro expansions have side effects that may > cause execution in other places of configure. I see. > >> m4_pushdef([AC_CONFIG_SUBDIRS], []) > >> AC_CONFIG_SUBDIRS([test/installtest]) > >> m4_popdef([AC_CONFIG_SUBDIRS]) > > But is this considered a cleaner way than getting that effect > > through the never-executed idiom I used above? > > It _is_ cleaner to disable things earlier in the code generation cycle. Ok, thanks! > > And more importantly, will your idiom have the desired effect: > > not disable option-checking by default? (The answer may be > > obvious to you autoconfers.) Silly me for not just testing; it does, thanks. > Meta-question: Why are you disabling option-checking in the first place? Missing a negation? > It's contrary to GNU Coding Standards (JFTR: I don't see support for that statement at <http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/>, just an incidental observation.) > (the ability to disable option > checking is provided for non-GNU packages, but doesn't get as much > testing because GNU packages shouldn't be using it in the first place). But I don't *want* to disable option-checking, that's just what happens when I have AC_CONFIG_SUBDIR! If I could, I'd explicitly enable it; the point of this request! brgds, H-P _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
