Re: autoscan: Advising that AC_FUNC_REALLOC is not The Right Thing (TM)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


I wrote:

> for background, I'm looking at tackling a bug
> (<URI:https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=1899047&group_id=97492&atid=618177>)
> with flex's build system that seems to stem from the use of
> AC_FUNC_REALLOC in configure.in without including gnulib's
> (or another) implementation.  I believe this can be fixed by
> simply omitting AC_FUNC_REALLOC (on the premise that
> realloc(p, 0) is never used).

>   The macro was originally added to configure.in on the sug-
> gestion of autoscan which basically means that in a few
> years some well-meaning developer will probably re-run auto-
> scan, re-add the macro and the bug will re-appear.

>   So is there a way to advise autoscan that it shouldn't
> suggest AC_FUNC_REALLOC?  Another (human) solution would of
> course be to add appropriate comments to configure.in and
> hope that they will be read, but I'd prefer something more
> robust.

No ideas at all? :-)

Tim


_______________________________________________
Autoconf mailing list
Autoconf@xxxxxxx
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf


[GCC Help]     [Kernel Discussion]     [RPM Discussion]     [Red Hat Development]     [Yosemite News]     [USB]     [Samba]

Add to Google Powered by Linux