[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Autoconf check for XML support?
From: |
Ari Johnson |
Subject: |
Re: Autoconf check for XML support? |
Date: |
Sun, 8 Dec 2002 19:37:14 -0600 (CST) |
I made a mistake in the patch, causing autoheader to fail on my system.
In the AC_DEFINE() call, it should read:
AC_DEFINE(HAVE_OST_CCXX2_XML_PARSING, 1, [Define this if the CommonC++
library was compiled with XML parsing support])
On Sun, 8 Dec 2002, Ari Johnson wrote:
>
> Attached please find a patch against src/ost_check2.m4 to add the
> following check:
> OST_CCXX2_XML([ACTION-IF-TRUE[,ACTION-IF-FALSE]])
>
> On a side note, I've found that I have to set LIBS=-lgettextlib while
> running a ./configure that calls OST_CCXX2_VERSION, because ccgnu2_config
> doesn't include that library but it is required on my system for
> getopt_long().
>
> Ari Johnson
>
> On Sat, 7 Dec 2002, Ari Johnson wrote:
>
> >
> > I want to check for XML support at ./configure time of my project, but
> > that won't be hard to set up a check for. As to the incremental code,
> > I've just been tracking the CVS version so I don't know what's in or out
> > of the stable branch. Thanks for confirming that it is. I'll send a
> > patch here if I get a chance to write the autoconf check.
> >
> > Ari Johnson
> >
> > On Sun, 8 Dec 2002, Federico Montesino Pouzols wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > I have just checked that the incremental code in the stable
> > > branch, does it fail somehow?
> > >
> > > As for the check for xml, COMMON_XML_PARSING is defined in
> > > cc++/config.h if xml support is built in.
> > >
> > > On Sat, Dec 07, 2002 at 02:20:49PM -0500, David Sugar wrote:
> > > > I thought the incremental XML parsing patch had made it into the current
> > > > distributions. Let me review that. The cc++/config.h file provides
> > > > compile time info on if xml support was built. Perhaps you can create a
> > > > simple macro which examines it. I think having a OST_CCXX2_XML check
> > > > might be a useful addition to ost_check2.m4.
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, 7 Dec 2002, Ari Johnson wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I see that there is an OST_CCXX2_DYNLOADER check among the autoconf
> > > > > macros
> > > > > defined by ost_check2.m4, but no such way to determine if XML support
> > > > > is
> > > > > built in. I'm at the point in my project where I need to make the
> > > > > decision to move to a more portable autoconf/automake build
> > > > > environment,
> > > > > and that means that I'll need my configure script to check for an
> > > > > appropriate version of CommonC++ as well as for built-in XML support.
> > > > > As to incremental XML parsing, I'll just have to assume that people
> > > > > use
> > > > > the CVS version until an incremented release number exists for the
> > > > > next
> > > > > release, when I do OST_CCXX2_VERSION.
> > > > >
> > > > > Would it overclutter things to include an OST_CCXX2_XML check, or is
> > > > > there
> > > > > perhaps a better way to accomplish this? Thanks.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ari Johnson
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Bug-commoncpp mailing list
> > > > > address@hidden
> > > > > http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-commoncpp
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Bug-commoncpp mailing list
> > > > address@hidden
> > > > http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-commoncpp
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bug-commoncpp mailing list
> > address@hidden
> > http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-commoncpp
> >
>