Bruno Haible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Simon Josefsson wrote: >> How about this? If for some reason HAVE_DECL_GETLINE is not defined >> at all, the header file fail to parse. > > What's the point in trying to use lib/getline.c without m4/getline.m4 ? > We engage ourselves to maintain both in sync, since they are part of a > single gnulib module. Anyone using only the .c file but not the .m4 will > have endless maintenance problems anyway.
In theory I agree, although in this particular instance, the proposed patch would not harm, and would change the test into a common idiom. But I don't feel strongly about it. This was also discovered while porting GNU SASL to uClinux. Perhaps I should investigate how difficult it would be to make uClinux run ./configure properly instead of maintaining the HAVE_* symbols manually. Thanks, Simon _______________________________________________ bug-gnulib mailing list bug-gnulib@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnulib
