Loïc Minier wrote:
On Sun, Mar 19, 2006, Robert Collins wrote:

Sure but lets not let the perfect be the enemy of the good:
There are two patches now that will correct AM_PATH_CHECK with -Werror
in CFLAGS. Both are improvements, and I'm completely happy with either
being applied which will fix the bug. Additionally, neither make
refactoring or replacing AM_PATH_CHECK later harder - they do not change
its structure or introduce additional complexity.


 Exactly.  Please think of backward-compatibility for people using
 AM_PATH_CHECK in their configure.ac.

Yes, that's quite fair, compatability is certainly more important than cleanliness.

These are the things I'd still like done Check 0.9.4:
  -- fix AM_PATH_CHECK
  -- make Check pass its own unit tests: make distcheck fails
  -- use stricter CFLAGS for compiling Check
  -- update the documentation so that the tutorial works
  -- deprecate the old API: Check clobbers things, e.g. fail() in C++

The last version of Check that passed its own unit tests was 0.9.2.

 The -version mentionned previously doesn't help in the task of
 detecting whether libcheck is available in the build environment.

 What you could *add* to the library is a pkg-config (.pc) file, which
 would permit using pkg-config's macros to check for the availability
 and the version of libcheck (pkg-config now supports the static /
 dynamic linking flags distinction).  That should be in addition to the
 macro (which should simply be deprecated).

Thanks, I'll look at pkg-config. As for deprecating the old macro, maybe it's possible then to make it do nothing but print out "AM_PATH_CHECK is deprecated; it will go away by version 1.0.0".

I just heard from the Check maintainer, he's going to be busy until the end of April I think. But he offered me repository access, so that's good.

Cheers,
Chris


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to