On Sunday 31 May 2009 04:44:17 Bruno Haible wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > +# ifndef PACKAGE_PACKAGER_VERSION
> > > +# define PACKAGE_PACKAGER_VERSION ""
> > > +# endif
> >
> > i think it makes sense for this line to read:
> > > +# define PACKAGE_PACKAGER_VERSION _("no version info")
>
> If
This adds three new configure options for packagers to utilize:
--with-packager="packager name"
--with-packager-version="packager-specific version"
--with-packager-bug-reports="packager bug reporting"
An example with coreutils:
$ ./configure \
--with-packager=Gento
Eric Blake wrote:
> I noticed you just pushed test-alignof.c. Should this file also check
> 'long double', and (where available) 'long long int', particularly since
> these types often have smaller alignment than size?
Good point here as well. I'm adding them:
2009-05-31 Bruno Haible
Eric Blake wrote:
> So if I understand correctly, you are trading one set of portability
> problems (the AIX workaround guesses wrong for char and short) for another
> (alignof() must not be used to initialize an enumerator, but can be used
> in all other contexts). Shouldn't this at least be docu
Hi Simon,
Thanks for insisting.
> How about this patch?
It goes into this direction, yes. Additionally, it looks like most callers
of the 'alignof' macro want the "field in struct" semantics (or at least,
can live with this semantics). So I'm using this semantics for 'alignof'.
I'll push this:
Hi Simon,
> > This would cause problems in libintl. The intl/ directory, when shipped
> > as part of a package that used gettextize, should not create its own copy
> > of stdint.h.
>
> Btw, why not? It seems it could create it under, say, intl/gl/
It could, certainly. But packages that include
Bruno Haible wrote:
> Eric Blake wrote:
>> > I don't think it is a bug. memchr could also be implemented by doing
>> > a backwards search and still be conforming to ISO C99 and POSIX:
>>
>> The Austin Group disagrees with you. Here is the results from the meeting
>> yesterday
>> (https://www.openg
Eric Blake wrote:
> > I don't think it is a bug. memchr could also be implemented by doing
> > a backwards search and still be conforming to ISO C99 and POSIX:
>
> The Austin Group disagrees with you. Here is the results from the meeting
> yesterday
> (https://www.opengroup.org/sophocles/show_mai
Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > +# ifndef PACKAGE_PACKAGER_VERSION
> > +# define PACKAGE_PACKAGER_VERSION ""
> > +# endif
>
> i think it makes sense for this line to read:
> > +# define PACKAGE_PACKAGER_VERSION _("no version info")
If there is no version info, why not simply display nothing?
#ifdef
