avoiding obsolete macros like AC_TRY_RUN [Re: gnulib-izing sharutils

2009-08-31 Thread Jim Meyering
Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > * Bruno Haible wrote on Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 11:30:53PM CEST: >> > configure.ac:21: warning: The macro `AC_TRY_RUN' is obsolete. >> >> You can ignore these warnings. AC_TRY_RUN and AC_TRY_LINK cannot go away >> because hundreds of autoconf macros use them. > > I'd venture t

Re: gnulib-izing sharutils

2009-08-31 Thread Bruce Korb
Bruno Haible wrote: > Ah, I see. The version that matters is the one of the GNU gettext macros that > will be used. ...will be used *at program build time*. > Therefore `gettext --version` is irrelevant; what matters is > what 'aclocal' will fetch later. How would you like the notice to be > formul

Re: gnulib-izing sharutils

2009-08-30 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
Hello Bruno, * Bruno Haible wrote on Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 11:30:53PM CEST: > > configure.ac:21: warning: The macro `AC_TRY_RUN' is obsolete. > > You can ignore these warnings. AC_TRY_RUN and AC_TRY_LINK cannot go away > because hundreds of autoconf macros use them. I'd venture to guess that if g

Re: gnulib-izing sharutils

2009-08-30 Thread Bruno Haible
> >>> Notice from module error: > >>> If you are using GNU gettext version 0.16.1 or older, add the following > >>> options > >>> to XGETTEXT_OPTIONS in your po/Makevars: > >>> --flag=error:3:c-format --flag=error_at_line:5:c-format > > > > It cannot be easily suppressed, because gnulib-t

Re: gnulib-izing sharutils

2009-08-30 Thread Bruce Korb
Hi Bruno, Bruno Haible wrote: > Hi Bruce, > >> gnulib-izing sharutils > > You are welcome to send a one-line patch to gnulib/users.txt! Sure. Be happy to. First, though, I think I need to get sharutils working >>> Notice from module error: >>> If you are using GNU gettext version 0.16.

Re: gnulib-izing sharutils

2009-08-30 Thread Bruno Haible
Hi Bruce, > gnulib-izing sharutils You are welcome to send a one-line patch to gnulib/users.txt! You are also welcome to help improving the gnulib documentation. > I guess the following message is > innocuous, but since I've got gettext version 0.17, couldn't this > message get suppressed? Or,