On 04.08.2011 11:07, Julian Foad wrote:
> Peter Samuelson wrote:
>> [Peter Samuelson]
>>> (It's news to me, in fact, that it was even possible to build a
>>> recent version of neon in such a way that it doesn't support the
>>> features we use.)
>>
>> Followup from IRC: we determined that the reason Doug's neon library
>> didn't support XML functions is, he used 'configure --without-webdav'.
>> If you don't say --without-webdav, the neon configure script will
>> indeed find an appropriate XML library or die trying.
>>
>> Now ... it would be possible to detect, explicitly, that neon was built
>> --without-webdav, and tailor our error appropriately. But it'd be ugly
>> code. Is it worth it? Do other users run into this problem?
>
> I'd say, don't look for this specific problem, just change our error
> message to be more honest. 'configure' has already printed
>
> "checking neon library version... 0.29.6"
>
> and the problem with the current error message
>
> "cannot find Neon"
>
> was simply that it contradicts the earlier message. So, on failure to
> compile and link a test program, just make the message say something
> like
>
> "failed to compile and link a test program"
>
> instead. That's enough to make the user look at 'config.log' for more
> details.
<bikeshed>
checking neon usability... no
</bikeshed>
This is similar to the standard header checks, e.g.
checking stdio.h usability... yes
checking stdio.h presence... yes
checking for stdio.h... yes
Regards,
Rainer
Received on 2011-08-04 19:57:46 CEST