Re: lynx-dev [2.8.1] why no bold links?

[pg]

In a recent note, address@hidden said:

> Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 08:39:32 -0500 (EST)
> 
> > I have another problem with the configure script now that I am trying 
> > to install 2.81 at my university (this time as a user without root 
> > privs). The configure script dies when it discovers that gcc is broken 
> > despite the fact there is a perfectly good ANSI cc in the PATH. It 
> > seems to me this could be improved.  
> 
> which one is first in the path?  (this is really a separate problem - autoconf
> or your environment: the former if the configure script picks up a program
> in the wrong order in the path, or your environment if you don't reorder
> $PATH to make it workable).
> 
Umm.  No.  What Tim is saying (if I understand) is that configure looks for
"gcc" in the PATH, and on finding it but discovering it is broken, doesn't
go back and try "cc".  A quick test indicates that configure prefers "gcc"
over "cc" regardless of which is first in PATH.  I'm not sure this could be
improved.  If configure fails the last test using "gcc", should it go back
and retry the entire suite with "cc"?  At some point, it's best not to
increase the complexity of configure, and leave it the user's responsibility. 
Use the command, e.g.:

    CC=c89 ../lynx2-8-2/configure

to force use of a POSIX C compiler instead of gcc.

Note my related dissatisfaction:  The POSIX name is "c89".  IMO, configure
should try "c89" as a compiler name before the informal "cc".  I'll
grant GNU's self-interest in trying "gcc" before either of them.  :-)
But it matters little; it's only one of a half dozen options I supply
to configure.

-- gil