Control: tags -1 fixed-upstream On 2023-07-09 Helmut Grohne <hel...@subdivi.de> wrote: > On Sun, Jul 09, 2023 at 04:04:20PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote: [...] > > Also wouldn't using AC_FUNC_STRERROR_R be a better fix? (I do not expect > > you to provide this, I asking for your opinion)
> After having read the documentation of that macro, I am unsure whether > it resolves what is being checked here. AC_FUNC_STRERROR_R checks for > the function and also for how it is being declared, but makes no > statement about its return value. If there is a connection between > return type and return value that I don't see, then yes, this may be > better. Otherwise, this probably still is better than using > AC_CHECK_FUNC outside. Maybe that connection is XSI <=> int return, GNU > <=> pointer return? Hello, Yes, afaiu the two different strerrors can be distinguished by their return type (according to strerror_r(3)) and that is exactly what AC_FUNC_STRERROR_R provides without needing AC_RUN_IFELSE. The AC_RUN_IFELSE check also tests whether strerror_r() returns 0 (XSI) or a pointer (i.e. <>0). Nevermind ... this has been fixed upstream. (With AC_COMPILE_IFELSE). https://github.com/p11-glue/p11-kit/commit/3ba2c55dfdc8ff20de369f07f6c57d08718d3add cu Andreas -- `What a good friend you are to him, Dr. Maturin. His other friends are so grateful to you.' `I sew his ears on from time to time, sure'
