downgrade to 2.8 (GPLv2)

Signed-off-by: Anas Nashif <anas.nashif@intel.com>

1 files changed, 71 insertions, 71 deletions

diff --git a/m4/stdbool.m4 b/m4/stdbool.m4
index 3d672d7..2204ecd 100644
--- a/m4/stdbool.m4
+++ b/m4/stdbool.m4
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Check for stdbool.h that conforms to C99.
 
-dnl Copyright (C) 2002-2006, 2009-2010 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
+dnl Copyright (C) 2002-2006 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
 dnl This file is free software; the Free Software Foundation
 dnl gives unlimited permission to copy and/or distribute it,
 dnl with or without modifications, as long as this notice is preserved.
@@ -38,78 +38,78 @@ AC_DEFUN([AC_HEADER_STDBOOL],
   [AC_CACHE_CHECK([for stdbool.h that conforms to C99],
      [ac_cv_header_stdbool_h],
      [AC_TRY_COMPILE(
-        [
-          #include <stdbool.h>
-          #ifndef bool
-           "error: bool is not defined"
-          #endif
-          #ifndef false
-           "error: false is not defined"
-          #endif
-          #if false
-           "error: false is not 0"
-          #endif
-          #ifndef true
-           "error: true is not defined"
-          #endif
-          #if true != 1
-           "error: true is not 1"
-          #endif
-          #ifndef __bool_true_false_are_defined
-           "error: __bool_true_false_are_defined is not defined"
-          #endif
+	[
+	  #include <stdbool.h>
+	  #ifndef bool
+	   "error: bool is not defined"
+	  #endif
+	  #ifndef false
+	   "error: false is not defined"
+	  #endif
+	  #if false
+	   "error: false is not 0"
+	  #endif
+	  #ifndef true
+	   "error: true is not defined"
+	  #endif
+	  #if true != 1
+	   "error: true is not 1"
+	  #endif
+	  #ifndef __bool_true_false_are_defined
+	   "error: __bool_true_false_are_defined is not defined"
+	  #endif
 
-          struct s { _Bool s: 1; _Bool t; } s;
+	  struct s { _Bool s: 1; _Bool t; } s;
 
-          char a[true == 1 ? 1 : -1];
-          char b[false == 0 ? 1 : -1];
-          char c[__bool_true_false_are_defined == 1 ? 1 : -1];
-          char d[(bool) 0.5 == true ? 1 : -1];
-          bool e = &s;
-          char f[(_Bool) 0.0 == false ? 1 : -1];
-          char g[true];
-          char h[sizeof (_Bool)];
-          char i[sizeof s.t];
-          enum { j = false, k = true, l = false * true, m = true * 256 };
-          _Bool n[m];
-          char o[sizeof n == m * sizeof n[0] ? 1 : -1];
-          char p[-1 - (_Bool) 0 < 0 && -1 - (bool) 0 < 0 ? 1 : -1];
-          #if defined __xlc__ || defined __GNUC__
-           /* Catch a bug in IBM AIX xlc compiler version 6.0.0.0
-              reported by James Lemley on 2005-10-05; see
-              http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2005-10/msg00086.html
-              This test is not quite right, since xlc is allowed to
-              reject this program, as the initializer for xlcbug is
-              not one of the forms that C requires support for.
-              However, doing the test right would require a run-time
-              test, and that would make cross-compilation harder.
-              Let us hope that IBM fixes the xlc bug, and also adds
-              support for this kind of constant expression.  In the
-              meantime, this test will reject xlc, which is OK, since
-              our stdbool.h substitute should suffice.  We also test
-              this with GCC, where it should work, to detect more
-              quickly whether someone messes up the test in the
-              future.  */
-           char digs[] = "0123456789";
-           int xlcbug = 1 / (&(digs + 5)[-2 + (bool) 1] == &digs[4] ? 1 : -1);
-          #endif
-          /* Catch a bug in an HP-UX C compiler.  See
-             http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-12/msg02303.html
-             http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2005-11/msg00161.html
-           */
-          _Bool q = true;
-          _Bool *pq = &q;
-        ],
-        [
-          *pq |= q;
-          *pq |= ! q;
-          /* Refer to every declared value, to avoid compiler optimizations.  */
-          return (!a + !b + !c + !d + !e + !f + !g + !h + !i + !!j + !k + !!l
-                  + !m + !n + !o + !p + !q + !pq);
-        ],
-        [ac_cv_header_stdbool_h=yes],
-        [ac_cv_header_stdbool_h=no])])
+	  char a[true == 1 ? 1 : -1];
+	  char b[false == 0 ? 1 : -1];
+	  char c[__bool_true_false_are_defined == 1 ? 1 : -1];
+	  char d[(bool) 0.5 == true ? 1 : -1];
+	  bool e = &s;
+	  char f[(_Bool) 0.0 == false ? 1 : -1];
+	  char g[true];
+	  char h[sizeof (_Bool)];
+	  char i[sizeof s.t];
+	  enum { j = false, k = true, l = false * true, m = true * 256 };
+	  _Bool n[m];
+	  char o[sizeof n == m * sizeof n[0] ? 1 : -1];
+	  char p[-1 - (_Bool) 0 < 0 && -1 - (bool) 0 < 0 ? 1 : -1];
+	  #if defined __xlc__ || defined __GNUC__
+	   /* Catch a bug in IBM AIX xlc compiler version 6.0.0.0
+	      reported by James Lemley on 2005-10-05; see
+	      http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2005-10/msg00086.html
+	      This test is not quite right, since xlc is allowed to
+	      reject this program, as the initializer for xlcbug is
+	      not one of the forms that C requires support for.
+	      However, doing the test right would require a run-time
+	      test, and that would make cross-compilation harder.
+	      Let us hope that IBM fixes the xlc bug, and also adds
+	      support for this kind of constant expression.  In the
+	      meantime, this test will reject xlc, which is OK, since
+	      our stdbool.h substitute should suffice.  We also test
+	      this with GCC, where it should work, to detect more
+	      quickly whether someone messes up the test in the
+	      future.  */
+	   char digs[] = "0123456789";
+	   int xlcbug = 1 / (&(digs + 5)[-2 + (bool) 1] == &digs[4] ? 1 : -1);
+	  #endif
+	  /* Catch a bug in an HP-UX C compiler.  See
+	     http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-12/msg02303.html
+	     http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2005-11/msg00161.html
+	   */
+	  _Bool q = true;
+	  _Bool *pq = &q;
+	],
+	[
+	  *pq |= q;
+	  *pq |= ! q;
+	  /* Refer to every declared value, to avoid compiler optimizations.  */
+	  return (!a + !b + !c + !d + !e + !f + !g + !h + !i + !!j + !k + !!l
+		  + !m + !n + !o + !p + !q + !pq);
+	],
+	[ac_cv_header_stdbool_h=yes],
+	[ac_cv_header_stdbool_h=no])])
    AC_CHECK_TYPES([_Bool])
    if test $ac_cv_header_stdbool_h = yes; then
-     AC_DEFINE([HAVE_STDBOOL_H], [1], [Define to 1 if stdbool.h conforms to C99.])
+     AC_DEFINE(HAVE_STDBOOL_H, 1, [Define to 1 if stdbool.h conforms to C99.])
    fi])