W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-lib@w3.org > January to March 2006

HAVE_APPKIT_H check inappropriate for Mac OS X

From: Roger Persson <roger.persson@post.utfors.se>
Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2006 23:19:09 +0100
Message-Id: <89652c066fae5f4f775d37ef684fcc88@post.utfors.se>
To: www-lib@w3.org

Hello folks,

An earlier posting, back some years ago, noticed the problem with 
AC_CHECK_HEADERS(appkit/appkit.h appkit.h) in configure.ac on Mac OS X.

Shortly, the WWW-library checks for appkit.h or appkit/appkit.h and 
wrongly include this header on Mac OS X in wwwsys.h. The bootstrap 
procedure worked back some years ago for me, but GCC's ability to 
include header files case insensitive (<appkit/appkit.h> <=> 
<AppKit/AppKit.h>) may be the reason for current failure. (?) I'm using 
gcc 4.0.1.

If it should be left, I suggest we introduce a NEXTSTEP host-switch, 
like the MINGW32 and the CYGWIN. But if it shouldn't be left, I suggest 
we uncomment the line with a short comment. There is no need for this 
header on Mac OS X.

I would greatfully apprecate hints how to fix this, without relaying on 
changing configure.ac all the time.

Thanks in advance.


 From http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-lib/2001OctDec/0017:
> From: Jake Hamby <jehamby@anobject.com>
> Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2001 14:31:06 -0700
> To: www-lib@w3.org
> Message-Id: <9AB44402-C4D8-11D5-9862-0030655288AC@anobject.com>
> Hi,
> Just a quick note regarding a bug I noticed with Libwww on Mac OS X.
> There is a configure check for the presence of <appkit/appkit.h> or
> <appkit.h> (the NeXT Application Kit).  On OS X,  configure sets
> HAVE_APPKIT_APPKIT_H and <appkit/appkit.h> is then included by
> Library/src/wwwsys.h.
> While this unnecessary (as far as I can tell) #include doesn't hurt the
> build of Libwww itself, it causes problems with C++ programs which use
> libwww, as the C++ compiler can't handle the Objective-C syntax in the
> included AppKit headers.  My suggestion would be to remove the
> HAVE_APPKIT checks completely, as they appear to serve no useful value,
> and introduce an unnecessary dependency on an unused library.  The only
> possibility I can think of for their presence is that maybe there was 
> an
> old version of NEXTSTEP that required the AppKit to be included to pick
> up some functionality that would normally be in a more standard header?
> -Jake
Received on Sunday, 12 March 2006 04:24:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:33:56 UTC