RE: 2.49e problems with gcc

[Tim Van Holder]

> | Nice patch, but I don't think it works.  I'd be surprised if you
> | actually have the #undef templates in config.h.in since you pass an sh
> | var, which is opaque to autoheader.  You need `static' values for
> | autoheader.  That's why they had the last chunk.
> |
> | Use
> |
> | -if test x = y ; then
> | -    AC_DEFINE(translit([HAVE_DECL_$1], [a-z], [A-Z]), 1,
> | -      [Define to 1 if we found this declaration otherwise
> define to 0.]))dnl
> | -fi
Tried it; didn't work ($1 is a list, including continuation characters).

I now use this:

if test x = y ; then
  AC_FOREACH([AC_Symbol], [$1],
    [AC_DEFINE_UNQUOTED(AC_TR_CPP([HAVE_DECL_]AC_Symbol), 1,
                        [Define to 1 if you have the declaration
                         of `]AC_Symbol[', and to 0 if you don't.])])
fi

(partly stolen from AC_CHECK_DECLS) but this requires cvs autoconf, I
believe.
Is there a good way to say this in 2.13-speak, so I can suggest a patch to
the gcc maintainers?