(jm_FUNC_REALLOC): Change the `checking ...' message

to be more precise.  Rather than saying we're checking whether the
function `works', say what we're testing.
This commit is contained in:
Jim Meyering 2002-04-09 17:55:36 +00:00
parent aa77b79b4b
commit 72af85a647

View File

@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
#serial 5
#serial 6
dnl From Jim Meyering.
dnl Determine whether realloc works when both arguments are 0.
@ -12,7 +12,8 @@ AC_DEFUN([jm_FUNC_REALLOC],
AC_DEFINE(HAVE_DONE_WORKING_REALLOC_CHECK, 1,
[Define if the realloc check has been performed. ])
AC_CACHE_CHECK([for working realloc], jm_cv_func_working_realloc,
AC_CACHE_CHECK([whether realloc(0,0) returns a non-NULL pointer],
jm_cv_func_working_realloc,
[AC_TRY_RUN([
char *realloc ();
int
@ -23,7 +24,7 @@ AC_DEFUN([jm_FUNC_REALLOC],
],
jm_cv_func_working_realloc=yes,
jm_cv_func_working_realloc=no,
dnl When crosscompiling, assume realloc is broken.
dnl When crosscompiling, assume realloc(0,0) returns NULL.
jm_cv_func_working_realloc=no)
])
if test $jm_cv_func_working_realloc = no; then