From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2007 22:22:59 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] autoconf: Add test for OLD_ICONV
Message-ID: <7vd4tkn5mk.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <200712052226.53543.jnareb@gmail.com>

Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> writes:

> Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> +AC_MSG_CHECKING([for old iconv()])
>>> +AC_COMPILE_IFELSE(OLDICONVTEST_SRC,
>>> +	[AC_MSG_RESULT([no])],
>>> +	[AC_MSG_RESULT([yes])
>>> +	OLD_ICONV=YesPlease])
>>> +AC_SUBST(OLD_ICONV)
>>>  
>> 
>> Which result does COMPILE_IFELSE give for non error warnings?  Ok, or
>> Bad?
>
>  - Macro: AC_COMPILE_IFELSE (INPUT, [ACTION-IF-FOUND],
>           [ACTION-IF-NOT-FOUND])
>      Run the compiler and compilation flags of the current language
>      (*note Language Choice::) on the INPUT, run the shell commands
>      ACTION-IF-TRUE on success, ACTION-IF-FALSE otherwise.  The INPUT
>      can be made by `AC_LANG_PROGRAM' and friends.
>
> And if I have checked correctly code which causes only warnings
> returns Ok (in this case print 'no' after 'checking for old iconv()... '
> and do not set OLD_ICONV, which means it will be unset).

Which means the real-life compilation will get the warning on type
mismatch.  Wasn't OLD_ICONV about squelching that?