Its not a macro.
I meant that the code generated by
AC_REPLACE_FUNCS([getaddrinfo]) by configure.in for "configure"
does not have
"#include <netdb.h>". Hence function is not detected(unresolved
getaddrinfo).
Hence I thought AC_TRY_LINK could give test program
instead of AC_REPLACE_FUNCS taking one.
$ diff -r configure.in
configure.in.new
918a919
> AC_MSG_CHECKING([for
getaddrinfo])
920c921,926
<
AC_REPLACE_FUNCS([getaddrinfo])
---
> AC_TRY_LINK([#include
<netdb.h> #include
<assert.h>],
>
[char (*f)();f=getaddrinfo;],
> ac_cv_func_getaddrinfo=yes,
ac_cv_func_getaddrinfo=no)
> if test x"$ac_cv_func_getaddrinfo" = xyes;
then
> AC_DEFINE(HAVE_GETADDRINFO,1,[Define if you have the
getaddrinfo function])
> fi
923a930
>
AC_MSG_RESULT([$ac_cv_func_getaddrinfo])
Regards,
Rajesh R
--
This
space intentionally left non-blank.
-----Original
Message-----
From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday,
January 17, 2006 8:34 PM
To: R, Rajesh (STSD)
Cc:
pgsql-hackers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] [PATCH] Better
way to check for getaddrinfo function.
"R, Rajesh (STSD)"
<rajesh.r2@xxxxxx> writes:
> But the bottomline is the default test
does not include <netdb.h> in
> the test code.
That's
odd. Is getaddrinfo a macro on Tru64? If so, the appropriate patch
would probably make the test look more like the tests for finite() and
friends:
dnl Cannot use AC_CHECK_FUNC because finite may be a macro
AC_MSG_CHECKING(for finite) AC_TRY_LINK([ #include <math.h> double
glob_double;
],
[return
finite(glob_double) ? 0 :
1;],
[AC_DEFINE(HAVE_FINITE, 1, [Define to 1 if you have finite().])
AC_MSG_RESULT(yes)],
[AC_MSG_RESULT(no)])
regards, tom
lane
