Re: getline: protect prototype better

[Simon Josefsson]

Bruno Haible <address@hidden> writes:

> Simon Josefsson wrote:
>> How about this?  If for some reason HAVE_DECL_GETLINE is not defined
>> at all, the header file fail to parse.
>
> What's the point in trying to use lib/getline.c without m4/getline.m4 ?
> We engage ourselves to maintain both in sync, since they are part of a
> single gnulib module. Anyone using only the .c file but not the .m4 will
> have endless maintenance problems anyway.

In theory I agree, although in this particular instance, the proposed
patch would not harm, and would change the test into a common idiom.
But I don't feel strongly about it.

This was also discovered while porting GNU SASL to uClinux.

Perhaps I should investigate how difficult it would be to make uClinux
run ./configure properly instead of maintaining the HAVE_* symbols
manually.

Thanks,
Simon