Subject: bug#8718: error when using nested conditionals

From: Jack Kelly <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 19:32:38 +1000

On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 6:19 PM, Stefano Lattarini
<[email-masked]> wrote:
> Here is my idea: 'AM_IGNORE_UNDEFINED_CONDITIONALS' can accept two
> arguments, "yes" and "no" (defaulting to "yes" if no argument is given).
> The idea is that an usage like:
>
> -snip-
>
> will cause the generated configure to check that the FOO and BAZ
> conditionals are defined, but not to check that the BAR conditional
> is defined.  WDYT?

I have a counter-proposal.

AM_IGNORE_UNDEFINED_CONDITIONALS(REGEX) ignores
"undefined-conditional" errors for conditions that match REGEX. To
allow multiple packages to register their conditionals, make it append
REGEX to a list of regexen to check. If a conditional matches any of
these regexen, it is not an error.

AM_ENFORCE_UNDEFINED_CONDITIONALS(REGEX) does the opposite: if a
conditional is undefined, matches one of the
AM_IGNORE_UNDEFINED_CONDITIONALS regexen, but matches one of the
AM_ENFORCE_UNDEFINED_CONDITIONALS regexen, then it is still an error.

WDYT?

-- Jack