Yes, that's what I saw - thanks for the confirmation!
J

On 17 Sep 2009, at 19:41, David Anderson wrote:

> When running _autosetup on FC11, I get the following.
> If anyone knows how to get rid of them, let me know.
> -- David
>
>
> configure.ac:308: warning:  
> AC_CACHE_VAL(lt_prog_compiler_pic_works, ...): suspicious cache-id,  
> must contain _cv_ to be cached
> m4/libtool.m4:568: AC_LIBTOOL_COMPILER_OPTION is expanded from...
> m4/libtool.m4:4559: AC_LIBTOOL_PROG_COMPILER_PIC is expanded from...
> configure.ac:308: warning:  
> AC_CACHE_VAL(lt_prog_compiler_pic_works_CXX, ...): suspicious cache- 
> id, must contain _cv_ to be cached
> m4/libtool.m4:2604: _LT_AC_LANG_CXX_CONFIG is expanded from...
> m4/libtool.m4:2603: AC_LIBTOOL_LANG_CXX_CONFIG is expanded from...
> m4/libtool.m4:1646: _LT_AC_TAGCONFIG is expanded from...
> configure.ac:308: warning:  
> AC_CACHE_VAL(lt_prog_compiler_pic_works_F77, ...): suspicious cache- 
> id, must contain _cv_ to be cached
> m4/libtool.m4:3673: _LT_AC_LANG_F77_CONFIG is expanded from...
> m4/libtool.m4:3672: AC_LIBTOOL_LANG_F77_CONFIG is expanded from...
> configure.ac:308: warning:  
> AC_CACHE_VAL(lt_prog_compiler_pic_works_GCJ, ...): suspicious cache- 
> id, must contain _cv_ to be cached
> m4/libtool.m4:3773: _LT_AC_LANG_GCJ_CONFIG is expanded from...
> m4/libtool.m4:3772: AC_LIBTOOL_LANG_GCJ_CONFIG is expanded from...
>
> James Wanless wrote:
>> I don't know if it's related. [It could well just be my so-far  
>> inability to set up a correct Fedora10 machine for running the  
>> server on... I'm still experimenting... :)]
>> But, I experienced some (actually several) odd-looking warning  
>> messages when running the _autosetup stage on F10. They definitely  
>> weren't there for the same code under F8, and AFAIK, the code all  
>> seemed to compile and even run fine subsequently (F10 as well)  
>> despite these. I'm afraid I didn't log them, but they were all of  
>> the order "Suspicious xyz in abc" (IIRC). If it's of concern (or  
>> not easily explained by my ineptitude - any help very gratefully  
>> rec'd - thx), I can probably reproduce them here in exact detail if  
>> nec. This seemed to be for all/many recent changesets, including, I  
>> believe, even the server_stable of several months ago (I was  
>> curious, so checked! :). As I say they were doubly surprising (to  
>> me at least) both because the warnings were under the _later_  
>> version of Fedora, and the use of the word 'Suspicious' several  
>> times, which I don't think I for one, have seen before.
>> Anyway seemed I ought to flag it in response to this message  
>> (below), just-in-case...
>> J
>> On 17 Sep 2009, at 19:10, David Anderson wrote:
>>> I checked in changes that add options to all server programs:
>>> --help prints the usage
>>> --version prints the name of the repository and the version#
>>>   from which the program was built.
>>> This will require a _autosetup/configure/make at the top level.
>>>
>>> BTW, I've noticed a couple of problems in the build system:
>>>
>>> - "make" at the top level rebuilds everything in sched/,
>>>  even if it's up to date.
>>>
>>> - dependencies across directories are ignored in some cases.
>>>  For example, if you make everything,
>>>  then go to tools/ and touch backend_lib.cpp,
>>>  make doesn't rebuild anything.
>>>
>>> If any autoconf/automake experts can figure this out, let me know.
>>>
>>> -- David
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> boinc_dev mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev
>>> To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and
>>> (near bottom of page) enter your email address.
>
>


_______________________________________________
boinc_dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev
To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and
(near bottom of page) enter your email address.

Reply via email to