On Tuesday 04 September 2007, Karel Zak wrote: > On Mon, Sep 03, 2007 at 08:03:26PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > +]], [[int test = __NR_$1;]])],v > > + [sysnum="__NR_$1"],[sysnum=""]) > > + if test "x$sysnum" != "x" ; then > > + AC_MSG_RESULT([__NR_$1]) > > + else > > + case $host_cpu in > > + $2 > > + *) sysnum=-1;; > > + esac > > + if test "x$sysnum" = "x-1" ; then > > + AC_MSG_RESULT([unable to detect]) > > + else > > + AC_MSG_RESULT([$sysnum]) > > + fi > > + fi > > + AC_DEFINE_UNQUOTED([SYS_$1], $sysnum, [Fallback syscall number for > > $1 in place of __NR_$1]) + ]) > > +]) > > It means: > > #define SYS_<foo> -1 > > is case the syscall <foo> is unsupported by system during build time. > That's bad. It doesn't make sense to build utils that are completely > useless on arbitrary system. i interpreted one of the last converstations to mean we wanted this behavior ... but what you say makes sense, so i'll post a new one -mike
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
