[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Why was handling of program_prefix changed?

From: Franz Sirl
Subject: Re: Why was handling of program_prefix changed?
Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 11:06:24 +0200

At 03:09 18.05.2002, Paul Eggert wrote:
> Hmm, yeah, a separator would be better. And are $build, $host, $target
> really deprecated?

That's my vague impression, from looking at the code.

I think it makes more sense in this case to check the canonicalized names, but it would work nearly identical in either case.

> What I want is a way to set $target_alias on "native" builds without
>          a) triggering a cross-compile
>          b) setting $program_prefix

Now I'm starting to understand.  Can't you get the effect that you
want with "--target=HOST-TYPE --program-prefix=''"?  The documentation
suggests that this should do the trick; why doesn't it?

Yes, it does the trick, but it's unintuitive and cumbersome, afterall since ages autoconf tells us:

address@hidden:~/BUILD/kvirc-3.0.0]$ ./configure i386-redhat-linux
configure: WARNING: you should use --build, --host, --target

No mention of --program-prefix, so even if you change to use --build=i386-redhat-linux --host=i386-redhat-linux --target=i386-redhat-linux, you won't get back the original behaviour. Lateron there is:

checking whether we are cross compiling... no

yet autoconf insists on setting $program_prefix without even reporting it. I have a very strong opinion that _defaulting_ $program_prefix is very wrong here in the no-cross case. Maybe you want to solve it differently, but it should be solved.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]