From: Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>
To: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Ulrich Weigand <uweigand@de.ibm.com>,
eliz@gnu.org
Subject: Re: [patch] New test+use texinfo @click - @HAVE_MAKEINFO_CLICK@ [Re: doc build failure (Re: [patch 04/12] entryval#3: Virtual tail call frames)]
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 21:56:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201110102256.34728.pedro@codesourcery.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20111010184726.GA14706@host1.jankratochvil.net>
On Monday 10 October 2011 19:47:26, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> + if makeinfo conftest.texinfo >&5 2>&5; then
Shouldn't this be $(MAKEINFO) instead (like in Makefile.in)?
Though I'm not sure how to do that here. Maybe
AC_CHECK_PROGS(MAKEINFO, makeinfo) ?
> +if test x"$gdb_cv_have_makeinfo_click" = xyes; then
> + HAVE_MAKEINFO_CLICK="-DHAVE_MAKEINFO_CLICK"
> +else
> + HAVE_MAKEINFO_CLICK=""
> +fi
> +AC_SUBST(HAVE_MAKEINFO_CLICK)
AC_DEFINE is usualy better for predicate defines, such
as HAVE_FOOS. But in this is case, I think it's the variable's
name that is confusing. It should be somethink like MAKEINFO_EXTRA_FLAGS.
(MAKEINFOFLAGS is the moral equivalent of CFLAGS, so we should
leave it reserved for the user.)
if test x"$gdb_cv_have_makeinfo_click" = xyes; then
MAKEINFO_EXTRA_FLAGS="-DHAVE_MAKEINFO_CLICK"
else
MAKEINFO_EXTRA_FLAGS=""
fi
MAKEINFO=makeinfo @MAKEINFO_EXTRA_FLAGS@
Thanks!
--
Pedro Alves
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-10-10 21:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-09-29 19:50 [patch 04/12] entryval#3: Virtual tail call frames Jan Kratochvil
2011-10-09 19:27 ` [commit] " Jan Kratochvil
2011-10-09 20:23 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-10-10 13:40 ` doc build failure (Re: [patch 04/12] entryval#3: Virtual tail call frames) Ulrich Weigand
2011-10-10 13:54 ` Eli Zaretskii
2011-10-10 13:58 ` Ulrich Weigand
2011-10-10 14:58 ` [patch] New test+use texinfo @click - @HAVE_MAKEINFO_CLICK@ [Re: doc build failure (Re: [patch 04/12] entryval#3: Virtual tail call frames)] Jan Kratochvil
2011-10-10 15:16 ` Pedro Alves
2011-10-10 15:31 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-10-10 15:51 ` Pedro Alves
2011-10-10 18:47 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-10-10 19:11 ` Eli Zaretskii
2011-10-10 21:56 ` Pedro Alves [this message]
2011-10-10 22:19 ` Andreas Schwab
2011-10-11 23:34 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-10-12 15:26 ` Pedro Alves
2011-10-12 15:56 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-10-25 14:35 ` Joel Brobecker
2011-10-25 14:47 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-10-25 16:09 ` Joel Brobecker
2011-10-10 16:10 ` Eli Zaretskii
2011-10-10 16:15 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-10-10 16:09 ` Eli Zaretskii
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=201110102256.34728.pedro@codesourcery.com \
--to=pedro@codesourcery.com \
--cc=eliz@gnu.org \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=jan.kratochvil@redhat.com \
--cc=uweigand@de.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox