On 02 Dec 2023 19:17, Zack Weinberg wrote: > On Sat, Dec 2, 2023, at 6:37 PM, Karl Berry wrote: > > The best way to check if high-resolution > > timestamps are available to autom4te is to have perl load > > Autom4te::FileUtils and check if that also loaded Time::HiRes. > > > > The problem with that turned out to be that Time::HiRes got loaded from > > other system modules, resulting in the test thinking that autom4te used > > it when that wasn't actually the case. That's what happened in practice > > with your patch. > > Would it help if we added a command line option to autom4te that made it > report whether it thought it could use high resolution timestamps? Versions > of autom4te that didn't recognize this option should be conservatively > assumed not to support them.
upthread somewhere Karl (iirc) threw out a bikeshed idea like --has=<keyword>. i don't know if any of the autotools or GNU tools have such things that we could duplicate to avoid bikeshedding too much. that would make it work in this case easily, and setup framework for future checks. -mike
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
