Re: 01-as-require-shell-fn.patch

[Bonzini]

> Public please.

Sorry, unintended.

> As I already said, if it ever happens that such a shell exists
> (supports LINENO but not shfn), then we lose one round.  Sounds
> useless a risk to take.

The attached patch tries to detect both no-shfn shell and
LINENO-but-no-shfn.

> Apply the same idea with an embedded M4sh script containing a simple
> 
>       AS_INIT_WITH_SHELL_FUNCTIONS
> 
> and I'm happy.

I don't understand the need for another macro.  If it does not break
configure scripts (and that's why it's using a subshell), why not
putting the spy inside them too, so that it gets much more exposure?

Paolo

spy-functions-support.patch
Description: Text document