What's the point of a .m4-file with support for multiple pike versions (which would require an elaborate system to add macros, and support for having the same macro in different versions) instead of multiple files?
One could of course have a pike.m4 along with a AC_PIKE_INIT() or so with only 'include(/usr/include/pike/VERSION/aclocal.m4)' as it's body. Where version is taken from the arguments, and some code in the beginning to select a suitable one (as in, the one that is called when running pike --version) as default.
That's not very meaningful, though.
/ Per Hedbor ()
Previous text:
2004-01-26 21:02: Subject: Re: Pike @ Debian
On Mon, Jan 26, 2004 at 08:50:03PM +0100, Henrik Grubbström (Lysator) @ Pike (-) developers forum scribbled:
You only have a single version of pike installed??
No, but I can tell without big problems which pikes are available in Debian and set pike.m4 for them. I can also use, say,
/etc/pike/versions
and source it in pike.m4
marek
/ Brevbäraren
Perhaps it would be better to stop using autoconf entirely. Nobody seems to complain about Make.pl files, so perhaps that's the way to go.
/ Per Hedbor ()
Previous text:
2004-01-26 21:08: Subject: Re: Pike @ Debian
What's the point of a .m4-file with support for multiple pike versions (which would require an elaborate system to add macros, and support for having the same macro in different versions) instead of multiple files?
One could of course have a pike.m4 along with a AC_PIKE_INIT() or so with only 'include(/usr/include/pike/VERSION/aclocal.m4)' as it's body. Where version is taken from the arguments, and some code in the beginning to select a suitable one (as in, the one that is called when running pike --version) as default.
That's not very meaningful, though.
/ Per Hedbor ()
pike-devel@lists.lysator.liu.se
-
Per Hedbor () ＠ Pike (-) developers forum