[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: AC_OBJEXT again
From: |
Akim Demaille |
Subject: |
Re: AC_OBJEXT again |
Date: |
13 Dec 2000 13:39:49 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.0807 (Gnus v5.8.7) XEmacs/21.1 (Channel Islands) |
| On Dec 12, 2000, address@hidden wrote:
| > EXEEXT and OBJEXT don't need to know $CYGWIN etc.
|
| Ok, but I'd rather have the macros renamed to either _AC_HOST_???EXT
| or _AC_CC_???EXT (and only test with the C compiler).
I'm applying the patch as a starting point, these points are still to
be discussed.
Why should we limit ourselves to AC_PROG_CC? Technically it might be
a bit tricky to introduce asymmetry between the AC_LANG_COMPILER, but
I'm not sure to understand well the point either...
| But I'm also a bit unsure as to whether we should use _AC_LINK_IFELSE,
| given that this macro will tell the compiler to create an executable
| named `conftest', and this may disable whatever default extension the
| compiler might have selected.
Good point.
| The bad side of this is that, if we
| leave the decision up to the compiler, we'll get a.out or a.exe, which
| is out of autoconf's file namespace.
Bad point.
So the real question is, what happens when you use -o conftest? Will
the cross-compiler and native Win compilers produce conftest, or/and
conftest.exe? As long as conftest.exe is created when one `-o
conftest', we're doing good.
- Re: AC_OBJEXT again, (continued)
- Re: AC_OBJEXT again, Alexandre Oliva, 2000/12/08
- Re: AC_OBJEXT again, Akim Demaille, 2000/12/12
- Re: AC_OBJEXT again, Akim Demaille, 2000/12/12
- Re: AC_OBJEXT again, Peter Eisentraut, 2000/12/12
- Re: AC_OBJEXT again, Alexandre Oliva, 2000/12/12
- Re: AC_OBJEXT again, Akim Demaille, 2000/12/12
- Re: AC_OBJEXT again, Alexandre Oliva, 2000/12/12
- Re: AC_OBJEXT again, Akim Demaille, 2000/12/12
- Re: AC_OBJEXT again, akim, 2000/12/12
- Re: AC_OBJEXT again, Alexandre Oliva, 2000/12/12
- Re: AC_OBJEXT again,
Akim Demaille <=
- AC_CYGWIN etc. (Was: AC_OBJEXT again), Akim Demaille, 2000/12/13
- Re: AC_CYGWIN etc. (Was: AC_OBJEXT again), Mo DeJong, 2000/12/13
- Re: AC_CYGWIN etc. (Was: AC_OBJEXT again), Alexandre Oliva, 2000/12/13
- Re: AC_CYGWIN etc. (Was: AC_OBJEXT again), Mo DeJong, 2000/12/14
- Re: AC_CYGWIN etc. (Was: AC_OBJEXT again), Akim Demaille, 2000/12/14
- Re: AC_CYGWIN etc. (Was: AC_OBJEXT again), Mo DeJong, 2000/12/14
- Re: AC_CYGWIN etc. (Was: AC_OBJEXT again), Akim Demaille, 2000/12/14
- Re: AC_CYGWIN etc. (Was: AC_OBJEXT again), Akim Demaille, 2000/12/14
- Re: AC_CYGWIN etc. (Was: AC_OBJEXT again), Akim Demaille, 2000/12/14
- Re: AC_CYGWIN etc. (Was: AC_OBJEXT again), Mo DeJong, 2000/12/14