Re: Disable the present-but-cannot-be-compiled header warning?

[Paolo Bonzini]

> No warning that, since the aim was to move away from the old semantics
> to the new semantics, using `-' gets the user stuck with the old
> semantics which means he will put stones in the way of the intended
> move?

I think we need a better warning in the manual that [-] is not something
to be applied to indiscriminately suppress the warning.  But it will
have to be supported in the future.

I didn't understand really what was Jeff's usecase.

> I think a decent documentation should at least caution this as a
> last resort, and in conjunction with the warning, the normal use of the
> fourth argument should be suggested first.

Exactly.

> I take it that this is a decision to be stuck with the preprocessor test
> forever?  How about the idea of using a special argument to denote "try
> a compile test, but if it fails, then don't output that horrendous
> warning"?

That would be [AC_INCLUDES_DEFAULT].  But I think that suggesting
AC_INCLUDES_DEFAULT for people that really want a compile test is not
good.  What about leaving the warning and double test for a few more
years, but changing it to continue with the compiler result?

Paolo