From ab178c084a251fe568430f250d9719979957ec53 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Szymon Janc <szymon@janc.net.pl>
Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2011 21:10:00 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] * acinclude.m4: Use AC_LANG_PROGRAM macro to generate source
 code for  AC_LANG_CONFTEST macros.

---
 ChangeLog    |  5 +++++
 acinclude.m4 | 16 ++++++++++------
 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/ChangeLog b/ChangeLog
index 76526f4ec..88b883028 100644
--- a/ChangeLog
+++ b/ChangeLog
@@ -1,3 +1,8 @@
+2011-08-21 Szymon Janc <szymon@janc.net.pl>
+
+	* acinclude.m4: Use AC_LANG_PROGRAM macro to generate source code for
+	 AC_LANG_CONFTEST macros.
+
 2011-08-20  Szymon Janc <szymon@janc.net.pl>
 
 	Add grub-fstest option to uncompress data for commands.
diff --git a/acinclude.m4 b/acinclude.m4
index 7c38155d4..5c623baee 100644
--- a/acinclude.m4
+++ b/acinclude.m4
@@ -316,14 +316,14 @@ fi
 dnl Check if the C compiler generates calls to `__enable_execute_stack()'.
 AC_DEFUN([grub_CHECK_ENABLE_EXECUTE_STACK],[
 AC_MSG_CHECKING([whether `$CC' generates calls to `__enable_execute_stack()'])
-AC_LANG_CONFTEST([[
+AC_LANG_CONFTEST([AC_LANG_SOURCE([[
 void f (int (*p) (void));
 void g (int i)
 {
   int nestedfunc (void) { return i; }
   f (nestedfunc);
 }
-]])
+]])])
 if AC_TRY_COMMAND([${CC-cc} ${CFLAGS} -S conftest.c]) && test -s conftest.s; then
   true
 else
@@ -346,7 +346,9 @@ AC_DEFUN([grub_CHECK_STACK_PROTECTOR],[
 ssp_possible=yes]
 AC_MSG_CHECKING([whether `$CC' accepts `-fstack-protector'])
 # Is this a reliable test case?
-AC_LANG_CONFTEST([[void foo (void) { volatile char a[8]; a[3]; }]])
+AC_LANG_CONFTEST([AC_LANG_SOURCE([[
+void foo (void) { volatile char a[8]; a[3]; }
+]])])
 [# `$CC -c -o ...' might not be portable.  But, oh, well...  Is calling
 # `ac_compile' like this correct, after all?
 if eval "$ac_compile -S -fstack-protector -o conftest.s" 2> /dev/null; then]
@@ -364,7 +366,9 @@ AC_DEFUN([grub_CHECK_STACK_ARG_PROBE],[
 [# Smashing stack arg probe.
 sap_possible=yes]
 AC_MSG_CHECKING([whether `$CC' accepts `-mstack-arg-probe'])
-AC_LANG_CONFTEST([[void foo (void) { volatile char a[8]; a[3]; }]])
+AC_LANG_CONFTEST([AC_LANG_SOURCE([[
+void foo (void) { volatile char a[8]; a[3]; }
+]])])
 [if eval "$ac_compile -S -mstack-arg-probe -o conftest.s" 2> /dev/null; then]
   AC_MSG_RESULT([yes])
   [# Should we clear up other files as well, having called `AC_LANG_CONFTEST'?
@@ -399,7 +403,7 @@ AC_DEFUN([grub_CHECK_PIE],[
 pie_possible=yes]
 AC_MSG_CHECKING([whether `$CC' has `-fPIE' as default])
 # Is this a reliable test case?
-AC_LANG_CONFTEST([[
+AC_LANG_CONFTEST([AC_LANG_SOURCE([[
 #ifdef __PIE__
 int main() {
 	return 0;
@@ -407,7 +411,7 @@ int main() {
 #else
 #error NO __PIE__ DEFINED
 #endif
-]])
+]])])
 
 [# `$CC -c -o ...' might not be portable.  But, oh, well...  Is calling
 # `ac_compile' like this correct, after all?