httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefan Fritsch ...@sfritsch.de>
Subject Bumping autoconf AC_PREREQ to 2.60?
Date Sat, 12 Jun 2010 19:07:04 GMT
On Friday 11 June 2010, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
> > Modified: httpd/httpd/trunk/configure.in
> > URL:
> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/trunk/configure.in?rev=
> > 951893&r1=951892&r2=951893&view=diff
> > ================================================================
> > ============== --- httpd/httpd/trunk/configure.in (original)
> > +++ httpd/httpd/trunk/configure.in Sun Jun  6 16:54:51 2010
> > @@ -170,6 +170,9 @@ dnl PCRE and for our config tests will b
> >
> >  AC_PROG_CC
> >  AC_PROG_CPP
> >  
> >
> > +dnl Try to get c99 support for variadic macros
> > +AC_PROG_CC_C99
> > +
> 
> This test is only present since autoconf >= 2.60.
> Since 2.59 is still delivered with RedHat 4 / 5 this does not work
> there, but the error is non fatal.

This means it is not a good idea to run buildconf on RH4/5, but a 
configure created somewhere else with autoconf 2.60 should work fine.
So this mainly affects httpd developers.

We can either bump AC_PREREQ to 2.60, making it impossible to run 
buildconf on RH4/5, or we can include the code for AC_PROG_CC_C99  
(about 200 lines) from autoconf 2.60 in httpd's build system. The 
current state seems like a bad idea, because of the potential to ship 
a broken configure in release tarballs.

Preferences? Is anyone here developing on RHEL?

Mime
View raw message