🚀 go-pugleaf

When configuring, oleo 1.2 checks twice for the existence of ualarm.
It shouldn't have to check more than once.

Looking at the source code, ualarm is always present (perhaps because it is
defined in ualarm.c), so HAVE_UALARM is a misnomer.  HAVE_UALARM means ``was
ualarm provided by the underlying system?'', not ``do we have ualarm?''.
This is confusing.  Perhaps the substituted function should have a different
name, since it isn't a complete replacement for ualarm.

	sh configure
	checking for gcc
	checking how to run the C preprocessor
	checking for bison
	checking for install
	checking for POSIXized ISC
	checking for System V
	checking for return type of signal handlers
	checking for ANSI C header files
	checking for X11/X.h
	checking for working alloca.h
	checking for alloca
	checking for _doprnt
	checking for random
	checking for ualarm <---
	checking for ualarm <---
	checking for setitimer