Matthew Knepley <[email protected]> writes: > On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 11:32 PM, Jed Brown <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Barry Smith <[email protected]> writes: >> >> > Why not just always assume -lm is needed and only remove -lm if it >> doesn't exist? >> >> That would be fine with me. > > > How does this solve the problem? You might get an error from the linker if > -lm is not found (maybe not), > but you still cannot test that the symbols we expect to be there are > actually there.
True, but that is C89 so it's where they are suppose to be. It's amazing how much easier our configure would be if vendors consistently implemented the 25-year-old standards. I think libm is relatively conforming as these things go.
pgpFqWPghEykl.pgp
Description: PGP signature
