On Tue, 2020-11-03 at 20:39 -0300, Érico Nogueira via Elfutils-devel wrote: > On Tue Nov 3, 2020 at 10:33 PM -03, Dmitry V. Levin wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 01, 2020 at 09:48:50PM -0300, Érico Nogueira via > > Elfutils-devel wrote: > > > > > > +saved_LIBS="$LIBS" > > > +AC_SEARCH_LIBS([_obstack_free], [obstack]) > > > +LIBS="$saved_LIBS" > > > +case "$ac_cv_search__obstack_free" in > > > + no) AC_MSG_FAILURE([failed to find obstack_free]) ;; > > > + -l*) obstack_LIBS="$ac_cv_search__obstack_free" ;; > > > + *) obstack_LIBS= ;; > > > +esac > > > +AC_SUBST([obstack_LIBS]) > > > + > > > > Hmm. In [1] I suggested to check for obstack_free, but > > here I see you're checking for _obstack_free instead. > > Since both symbols are provided by glibc, I wonder what was > > the reason for this change. Is it something to do with libobstack? > > I'm using the version of libobstack [1] that as far as I know is used by > most musl-based distros (some of them pull directly from pullmoll's > personal repo rather than from the void-linux namespace). > > As you can see in [2], obstack_free is a macro, and AC_SEARCH_LIBS > didn't seem able to find it during my testing. On the other hand, > _obstack_free was an actual function, so I switched to it. > > > > > By the way, the text of AC_MSG_FAILURE is out of sync with the symbol > > name. > > Indeed. I can send a fix for it together with the argp patch if that's > ok. Thanks for noticing.
It does look like all (exported) obstack symbols start with _obstack (although there also is an non-underscore alias obstack_free in glibc). So checking for _obstack_free seems correct. If you could sent a patch (together with the argp check cleanup) to make the failure message to also mention the underscore that would be great. Thanks, Mark
