Debian Bug report logs - #734104
autoconf: uses old-style function definition, thus fails with -Werror=old-style-definition

Toggle useless messages

Message #5 received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net>

To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: autoconf: uses old-style function definition, thus fails with -Werror=old-style-definition

Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2014 22:22:27 +0100

Package: autoconf
Version: 2.69-2
Severity: minor

A developer may want to test his software with
-Werror=old-style-definition (in particular because such definitions
could be a real bug in the software). But configure fails because
autoconf generates such a function definition. For instance:

[...]
configure:4069: checking whether the C compiler works
configure:4130: gcc -O2 -Wall -Wold-style-declaration -Wold-style-definition -Wmissing-parameter-type -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-declarations -Wmissing-field-initializers -Werror   conftest.c  >&5
conftest.c: In function 'main':
conftest.c:12:1: error: old-style function definition [-Werror=old-style-definition]
 main ()
 ^
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
configure:4130: $? = 1
configure:4144: result: no
configure: failed program was:
| /* confdefs.h */
| #define PACKAGE_NAME "MPFR"
| #define PACKAGE_TARNAME "mpfr"
| #define PACKAGE_VERSION "3.2.0-dev"
| #define PACKAGE_STRING "MPFR 3.2.0-dev"
| #define PACKAGE_BUGREPORT ""
| #define PACKAGE_URL ""
| #define MPFR_USE_LOGGING 1
| /* end confdefs.h.  */
| 
| int
| main ()
| {
| 
|   ;
|   return 0;
| }
configure:4144: error: in `/home/vlefevre/software/mpfr':
configure:4144: error: C compiler cannot create executables
See `config.log' for more details
[...]

Are there still compilers that fail on "int main(void) { ... }"?

In any case, certainly not when the compiler has been recognized
as gcc (like here).

-- System Information:
Debian Release: jessie/sid
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (500, 'stable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386

Kernel: Linux 3.11-2-amd64 (SMP w/8 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=POSIX, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash

Versions of packages autoconf depends on:
ii  debianutils  4.4
ii  m4           1.4.17-2
ii  perl         5.18.1-5

Versions of packages autoconf recommends:
ii  automake [automaken]  1:1.14.1-2

Versions of packages autoconf suggests:
pn  autoconf-archive  <none>
ii  autoconf-doc      2.69-2
pn  autoconf2.13      <none>
ii  gettext           0.18.3.1-2
ii  gnu-standards     2010.03.11-1
ii  libtool           2.4.2-1.6+local1

-- no debconf information

Message #10 received at 734104@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu>

To: Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net>, 734104@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#734104: autoconf: uses old-style function definition, thus fails with -Werror=old-style-definition

Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2014 21:30:29 -0800

On Fri, Jan 03, 2014 at 10:22:27PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> Package: autoconf
> Version: 2.69-2
> Severity: minor
> 
> A developer may want to test his software with
> -Werror=old-style-definition (in particular because such definitions
> could be a real bug in the software). But configure fails because
> autoconf generates such a function definition. For instance:

In my opinion, it's a mistake to run "configure" tests with -Werror.  I
suggest adding such flags after configure tests have been run, as with
the --enable-Werror configure flag supported by Open vSwitch:

    dnl OVS_ENABLE_WERROR
    AC_DEFUN([OVS_ENABLE_WERROR],
      [AC_ARG_ENABLE(
         [Werror],
         [AC_HELP_STRING([--enable-Werror], [Add -Werror to CFLAGS])],
         [], [enable_Werror=no])
       AC_CONFIG_COMMANDS_PRE(
         [if test "X$enable_Werror" = Xyes; then
            CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -Werror"
          fi])])

I guess that -Werror=old-style-definition is somewhat more restricted,
but a similar solution can be used.

Message #15 received at 734104@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net>

To: Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu>

Cc: 734104@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#734104: autoconf: uses old-style function definition, thus fails with -Werror=old-style-definition

Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2014 09:44:20 +0100

On 2014-01-07 21:30:29 -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 03, 2014 at 10:22:27PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > A developer may want to test his software with
> > -Werror=old-style-definition (in particular because such definitions
> > could be a real bug in the software). But configure fails because
> > autoconf generates such a function definition. For instance:
> 
> In my opinion, it's a mistake to run "configure" tests with -Werror.

I don't see why.

> I suggest adding such flags after configure tests have been run, as
> with the --enable-Werror configure flag supported by Open vSwitch:
> 
>     dnl OVS_ENABLE_WERROR
>     AC_DEFUN([OVS_ENABLE_WERROR],
>       [AC_ARG_ENABLE(
>          [Werror],
>          [AC_HELP_STRING([--enable-Werror], [Add -Werror to CFLAGS])],
>          [], [enable_Werror=no])
>        AC_CONFIG_COMMANDS_PRE(
>          [if test "X$enable_Werror" = Xyes; then
>             CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -Werror"
>           fi])])

This doesn't solve the problem at all: whether -Werror is used via
--enable-Werror or via

  ./configure ... CFLAGS="... -Werror"

the same errors will occur.

> I guess that -Werror=old-style-definition is somewhat more restricted,
> but a similar solution can be used.

Actually I wasn't using -Werror=old-style-definition directly, but

  ./configure CFLAGS="-Wall -Wold-style-declaration -Wold-style-definition
    -Wmissing-parameter-type -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-declarations
    -Wmissing-field-initializers -Werror"

IMHO, this is a good thing developers test that their software doesn't
generate warnings, possibly with some exceptions; some errors can be
avoided with -Wno-error=..., e.g. one needs -Wno-error=unused-function
in the case of MPFR (and also gcc-snapshot). The -Werror allows one to
do that in automatic tests without filtering the output.

Indeed if some new code generates a new warning, it may correspond to
a bug.

In the particular case of -Werror=old-style-definition, this has
corresponded to an obsolescent feature of C for more than 14 years,
so that there are no reasons why programs would still use this old
style definition.

My proposed patch concerning autoconf:

  http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/autoconf-patches/2014-01/msg00003.html

-- 
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@vinc17.net> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)

Message #20 received at 734104@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu>

To: Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net>

Cc: 734104@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#734104: autoconf: uses old-style function definition, thus fails with -Werror=old-style-definition

Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2014 21:55:56 -0800

On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 09:44:20AM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2014-01-07 21:30:29 -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 03, 2014 at 10:22:27PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > > A developer may want to test his software with
> > > -Werror=old-style-definition (in particular because such definitions
> > > could be a real bug in the software). But configure fails because
> > > autoconf generates such a function definition. For instance:
> > 
> > In my opinion, it's a mistake to run "configure" tests with -Werror.
> 
> I don't see why.

As compilers evolve, they will inevitably come to issue new warnings,
some of which will be triggered by configure tests.  Authors of Autoconf
tests cannot possibly write them to avoid all warnings issued by future
versions of GCC.

> > I suggest adding such flags after configure tests have been run, as
> > with the --enable-Werror configure flag supported by Open vSwitch:
> > 
> >     dnl OVS_ENABLE_WERROR
> >     AC_DEFUN([OVS_ENABLE_WERROR],
> >       [AC_ARG_ENABLE(
> >          [Werror],
> >          [AC_HELP_STRING([--enable-Werror], [Add -Werror to CFLAGS])],
> >          [], [enable_Werror=no])
> >        AC_CONFIG_COMMANDS_PRE(
> >          [if test "X$enable_Werror" = Xyes; then
> >             CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -Werror"
> >           fi])])
> 
> This doesn't solve the problem at all: whether -Werror is used via
> --enable-Werror or via
> 
>   ./configure ... CFLAGS="... -Werror"
> 
> the same errors will occur.

No, configuration time errors will not occur with this macro, because
this macro adds -Werror only after all of the configuration tests have
already run.

> > I guess that -Werror=old-style-definition is somewhat more restricted,
> > but a similar solution can be used.
> 
> Actually I wasn't using -Werror=old-style-definition directly, but
> 
>   ./configure CFLAGS="-Wall -Wold-style-declaration -Wold-style-definition
>     -Wmissing-parameter-type -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-declarations
>     -Wmissing-field-initializers -Werror"

If you did the same thing but dropped -Werror from CFLAGS and added
--enable-Werror, there would be no problem with configuration tests.

> IMHO, this is a good thing developers test that their software doesn't
> generate warnings, possibly with some exceptions; some errors can be
> avoided with -Wno-error=..., e.g. one needs -Wno-error=unused-function
> in the case of MPFR (and also gcc-snapshot). The -Werror allows one to
> do that in automatic tests without filtering the output.
> 
> Indeed if some new code generates a new warning, it may correspond to
> a bug.
> 
> In the particular case of -Werror=old-style-definition, this has
> corresponded to an obsolescent feature of C for more than 14 years,
> so that there are no reasons why programs would still use this old
> style definition.
> 
> My proposed patch concerning autoconf:
> 
>   http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/autoconf-patches/2014-01/msg00003.html

You reported this upstream?  I'm not sure why you're reporting it to
Debian also, then.

Message #25 received at 734104@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net>

To: Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu>

Cc: 734104@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#734104: autoconf: uses old-style function definition, thus fails with -Werror=old-style-definition

Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2014 13:30:25 +0100

Control: forwarded -1 http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-autoconf/2014-01/msg00003.html

On 2014-01-08 21:55:56 -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 09:44:20AM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > On 2014-01-07 21:30:29 -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 03, 2014 at 10:22:27PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > > > A developer may want to test his software with
> > > > -Werror=old-style-definition (in particular because such definitions
> > > > could be a real bug in the software). But configure fails because
> > > > autoconf generates such a function definition. For instance:
> > > 
> > > In my opinion, it's a mistake to run "configure" tests with -Werror.
> > 
> > I don't see why.
> 
> As compilers evolve, they will inevitably come to issue new warnings,
> some of which will be triggered by configure tests.  Authors of Autoconf
> tests cannot possibly write them to avoid all warnings issued by future
> versions of GCC.

I agree, but in the current case, the change is not required due to
a warning from GCC, but because of an obsolescent feature of C (but
both are related: the goal of the warning here is to signal the use
of an obsolescent feature of C).

> > > I suggest adding such flags after configure tests have been run, as
> > > with the --enable-Werror configure flag supported by Open vSwitch:
> > > 
> > >     dnl OVS_ENABLE_WERROR
> > >     AC_DEFUN([OVS_ENABLE_WERROR],
> > >       [AC_ARG_ENABLE(
> > >          [Werror],
> > >          [AC_HELP_STRING([--enable-Werror], [Add -Werror to CFLAGS])],
> > >          [], [enable_Werror=no])
> > >        AC_CONFIG_COMMANDS_PRE(
> > >          [if test "X$enable_Werror" = Xyes; then
> > >             CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -Werror"
> > >           fi])])
> > 
> > This doesn't solve the problem at all: whether -Werror is used via
> > --enable-Werror or via
> > 
> >   ./configure ... CFLAGS="... -Werror"
> > 
> > the same errors will occur.
> 
> No, configuration time errors will not occur with this macro, because
> this macro adds -Werror only after all of the configuration tests have
> already run.

Some configure tests *must* be done with the same options as the
compilation, so that some features in the program or the tests can be
disabled (via the preprocessor) if they are not supported due to the
use of -Werror.

> > > I guess that -Werror=old-style-definition is somewhat more restricted,
> > > but a similar solution can be used.
> > 
> > Actually I wasn't using -Werror=old-style-definition directly, but
> > 
> >   ./configure CFLAGS="-Wall -Wold-style-declaration -Wold-style-definition
> >     -Wmissing-parameter-type -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-declarations
> >     -Wmissing-field-initializers -Werror"
> 
> If you did the same thing but dropped -Werror from CFLAGS and added
> --enable-Werror, there would be no problem with configuration tests.

But the build (of the software or the tests) could fail due to a
feature that should have been disabled by an error detected with
-Werror at configure time.

> > My proposed patch concerning autoconf:
> > 
> >   http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/autoconf-patches/2014-01/msg00003.html
> 
> You reported this upstream?  I'm not sure why you're reporting it to
> Debian also, then.

I first reported the problem in Debian since Debian's autoconf version
is older than upstream's dev version (BTW, it seems that I've just
found another problem related to MPFR's Static Assertion test, which
is triggered with Debian's autoconf package, but not upstream) and
upstream doesn't have a BTS, AFAIK. Then I reported it upstream. Now,
I thought I also added the forwarded URL's to Debian's bug report, but
I forgot (GNU's mailing-list system is poorly designed: one has to
wait for the URL, so that it is easy to forget...). This is now done
with this message. Upstream told be to wrote a patch, which I did,
hence the URL just above.

-- 
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@vinc17.net> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)

Message #32 received at 734104@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu>

To: Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net>

Cc: 734104@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#734104: autoconf: uses old-style function definition, thus fails with -Werror=old-style-definition

Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2014 09:04:02 -0800

On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 01:30:25PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2014-01-08 21:55:56 -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 09:44:20AM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > > On 2014-01-07 21:30:29 -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Jan 03, 2014 at 10:22:27PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > > > I suggest adding such flags after configure tests have been run, as
> > > > with the --enable-Werror configure flag supported by Open vSwitch:
> > > > 
> > > >     dnl OVS_ENABLE_WERROR
> > > >     AC_DEFUN([OVS_ENABLE_WERROR],
> > > >       [AC_ARG_ENABLE(
> > > >          [Werror],
> > > >          [AC_HELP_STRING([--enable-Werror], [Add -Werror to CFLAGS])],
> > > >          [], [enable_Werror=no])
> > > >        AC_CONFIG_COMMANDS_PRE(
> > > >          [if test "X$enable_Werror" = Xyes; then
> > > >             CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -Werror"
> > > >           fi])])
> > > 
> > > This doesn't solve the problem at all: whether -Werror is used via
> > > --enable-Werror or via
> > > 
> > >   ./configure ... CFLAGS="... -Werror"
> > > 
> > > the same errors will occur.
> > 
> > No, configuration time errors will not occur with this macro, because
> > this macro adds -Werror only after all of the configuration tests have
> > already run.
> 
> Some configure tests *must* be done with the same options as the
> compilation, so that some features in the program or the tests can be
> disabled (via the preprocessor) if they are not supported due to the
> use of -Werror.

What's an example?

> > > > I guess that -Werror=old-style-definition is somewhat more restricted,
> > > > but a similar solution can be used.
> > > 
> > > Actually I wasn't using -Werror=old-style-definition directly, but
> > > 
> > >   ./configure CFLAGS="-Wall -Wold-style-declaration -Wold-style-definition
> > >     -Wmissing-parameter-type -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-declarations
> > >     -Wmissing-field-initializers -Werror"
> > 
> > If you did the same thing but dropped -Werror from CFLAGS and added
> > --enable-Werror, there would be no problem with configuration tests.
> 
> But the build (of the software or the tests) could fail due to a
> feature that should have been disabled by an error detected with
> -Werror at configure time.

I can't think of any example, can you please explain?

Message #37 received at 734104@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net>

To: Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu>

Cc: 734104@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#734104: autoconf: uses old-style function definition, thus fails with -Werror=old-style-definition

Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 03:32:12 +0100

On 2014-01-09 09:04:02 -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 01:30:25PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > Some configure tests *must* be done with the same options as the
> > compilation, so that some features in the program or the tests can be
> > disabled (via the preprocessor) if they are not supported due to the
> > use of -Werror.
> 
> What's an example?

Building MPFR trunk succeeds with

$ ./configure CC=gcc-snapshot CFLAGS="-Wall -pedantic"
$ make

and

$ ./configure CC=gcc-snapshot CFLAGS="-Wall -pedantic -Werror"
$ make

but fails with:

$ ./configure --enable-Werror CC=gcc-snapshot CFLAGS="-Wall -pedantic"
$ make

Threading support is checked at configure time. It is not supported
with "-pedantic -Werror" (due to use of extensions). If -Werror is
used at build time but not at configure time, the configure script
will detect that threading is supported (due to the missing -Werror),
though actually it isn't, so that the build fails.

> > But the build (of the software or the tests) could fail due to a
> > feature that should have been disabled by an error detected with
> > -Werror at configure time.
> 
> I can't think of any example, can you please explain?

See above.

-- 
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@vinc17.net> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)

Message #42 received at 734104@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu>

To: Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net>

Cc: 734104@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#734104: autoconf: uses old-style function definition, thus fails with -Werror=old-style-definition

Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2014 20:57:15 -0800

On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 03:32:12AM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2014-01-09 09:04:02 -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 01:30:25PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > > Some configure tests *must* be done with the same options as the
> > > compilation, so that some features in the program or the tests can be
> > > disabled (via the preprocessor) if they are not supported due to the
> > > use of -Werror.
> > 
> > What's an example?
> 
> Building MPFR trunk succeeds with
> 
> $ ./configure CC=gcc-snapshot CFLAGS="-Wall -pedantic"
> $ make
> 
> and
> 
> $ ./configure CC=gcc-snapshot CFLAGS="-Wall -pedantic -Werror"
> $ make
> 
> but fails with:
> 
> $ ./configure --enable-Werror CC=gcc-snapshot CFLAGS="-Wall -pedantic"
> $ make
> 
> Threading support is checked at configure time. It is not supported
> with "-pedantic -Werror" (due to use of extensions). If -Werror is
> used at build time but not at configure time, the configure script
> will detect that threading is supported (due to the missing -Werror),
> though actually it isn't, so that the build fails.

So threading is supported with -pedantic but yields warnings?  Then I'd
want the build to fail with -Werror, exactly so that I can fix the
warnings.  I don't see a problem here.  In my opinion, -Werror is a
developer tool, not a mode for building.

Message #47 received at 734104@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net>

To: Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu>

Cc: 734104@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#734104: autoconf: uses old-style function definition, thus fails with -Werror=old-style-definition

Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 10:13:39 +0100

On 2014-01-09 20:57:15 -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> So threading is supported with -pedantic but yields warnings?

For the C11 threading method, yes, because this is a C11 feature
used in C90 mode.

> Then I'd want the build to fail with -Werror,

No, because alternative solutions may exist (at worst, threading
should be disabled at configure time).

> exactly so that I can fix the warnings.

No, the warning is a feature:

  warning: ISO C90 does not support '_Thread_local' [-Wpedantic]

The MPFR configure tests whether the C11 feature _Thread_local works
in the current mode (here C90), and I expect this test to fail so that
one can test the behavior of a MPFR build with a C90-only compiler,
which mustn't fail.

> I don't see a problem here. In my opinion, -Werror is a developer
> tool, not a mode for building.

So what? This is exactly the way I use -Werror.

-- 
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@vinc17.net> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)

Message #52 received at 734104@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net>

To: 734104@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: autoconf: uses old-style function definition, thus fails with -Werror=old-style-definition

Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 09:36:29 +0100

Control: tags -1 upstream fixed-upstream

My patch:

  http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/autoconf-patches/2014-01/msg00003.html

which has been pushed:

  http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/autoconf-patches/2014-02/msg00009.html
  http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=autoconf.git;a=commit;h=1717921aa6c1ef559ef494675f6d1b20c2ae389e

-- 
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)

Message #59 received at 734104-done@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net>

To: 734104-done@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: autoconf: uses old-style function definition, thus fails with -Werror=old-style-definition

Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2021 03:16:48 +0200

Version: 2.71-2

On 2014-02-27 09:36:29 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> Control: tags -1 upstream fixed-upstream
> 
> My patch:
> 
>   http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/autoconf-patches/2014-01/msg00003.html
> 
> which has been pushed:
> 
>   http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/autoconf-patches/2014-02/msg00009.html
>   http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=autoconf.git;a=commit;h=1717921aa6c1ef559ef494675f6d1b20c2ae389e

Now fixed in Debian.

-- 
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.