On Tue, 2011-11-01 at 13:16 -0700, Jeremy Huddleston wrote: > The current test was always failing to compile because 'return 0;' was > global rather than in the body of a function. > > Signed-off-by: Jeremy Huddleston <[email protected]> > --- > xorg-macros.m4.in | 2 +- > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/xorg-macros.m4.in b/xorg-macros.m4.in > index 0527dfe..3b02190 100644 > --- a/xorg-macros.m4.in > +++ b/xorg-macros.m4.in > @@ -1431,7 +1431,7 @@ if test "x$GCC" = xyes ; then > AC_MSG_CHECKING([if $CC supports -Werror=attributes]) > save_CFLAGS="$CFLAGS" > CFLAGS="$CFLAGS $STRICT_CFLAGS -Werror=attributes" > - AC_COMPILE_IFELSE([AC_LANG_SOURCE([return 0;])], > + AC_COMPILE_IFELSE([AC_LANG_SOURCE([], [return 0;])], > [STRICT_CFLAGS="$STRICT_CFLAGS -Werror=attributes" > AC_MSG_RESULT([yes])], > [AC_MSG_RESULT([no])])
I used AC_LANG_PROGRAM and the generated test is:
int
main ()
{
return 0;
;
return 0;
}
Is this what you were expecting?
Using AC_LANG_PROGRAM([],[]) produces:
int
main ()
{
;
return 0;
}
Is that closer to what you want?
I did not experience the compile failure inititally.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
