Re: tcc 0.9.28rc testing: bug in autoconf 2.71 with AC_CHECK_DEFINE

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


> > On 24/9/23 11:03, Nick Bowler wrote:
> >> The word AC_CHECK_DEFINE is not found anywhere in the Autoconf
> >> source code or documentation.
> >
> > My guess would be that the 3rd party is the autoconf archive because
> > they provide both AX_CHECK_DEFINE and AC_CHECK_DEFINE
> >
> >;a=blob_plain;f=m4/ax_check_define.m4
> OK, I see.

Thanks Peter.
I can confirm, the "autoconf-archive" - Package is installed here.

> Ignoring the fact that the this macro definition flagrantly disregards
> the Autoconf reserved namespace...

That trap catched me.

> AC_CHECK_DEFINE here is quoting
> inconsistently: $1 is double-quoted in the argument to AC_LANG_PROGRAM,
> but it is only single-quoted in the arguments of AS_VAR_PUSHDEF and

Oh, thanks for the in deepth analysis.
I will check to see, how and where i can report this bug.

> So no amount of quoting at the call site will ever solve the problem for Detlef.

The suggested workarounds should help.

> We can quote __unix__ correctly for AC_LANG_PROGRAM, or we can
> quote it for the other expansions, but never both at the same time.

>  For example:
>  AC_CHECK_DEFINE([__unix@&t@__], [...])

>   m4_ifdef([__unix__], [m4_define([__unix__], [[__unix__]])])dnl
>   AC_CHECK_DEFINE([__unix__], [...])

I will try your suggested workarounds.

> I don't think there is any regression in Autoconf here, I don't see any
> significant difference in behaviour between Autoconf 2.72c, 2.71 or
> 2.69.

I was not sure, where the bug belongs, and with the "AC_" prefix, i started here.

Regards ... Detlef

[Index of Archives]     [GCC Help]     [Kernel Discussion]     [RPM Discussion]     [Red Hat Development]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux USB]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux