Paul Eggert wrote:
> By the way, can anybody explain the following comment
> in m4/include_next.m4?
>
> dnl gcc does not warn about some things, and on some systems (Solaris and
> Interix)
> dnl __STDC__ evaluates to 0 instead of to 1. The latter is an undesired side
> dnl effect; we are th
At the end of this messiage is a patch I imported from a pending glibc patch.
By the way, can anybody explain the following comment
in m4/include_next.m4?
dnl gcc does not warn about some things, and on some systems (Solaris and
Interix)
dnl __STDC__ evaluates to 0 instead of to 1. The latte
