Re: AC_TRY_RUN and cross-compiling (was: Re: ORBit 0.5.8 Cross-Compile problems...)

[Dan Kegel]

Ossama Othman wrote:
> > > I have to agree with Paul.  Sometimes it's just not possible to rely
> > > on compile/link-time tests alone.
> >
> > That's ok if three things hold:
> > 1. configure.in authors avoid gratuitous use of AC_TRY_RUN.
> 
> That should certainly be feasible unless there are some bizarre
> platforms out there.  In any case, this shouldn't be a problem if
> developers use a reasonable "action-if-cross-compiling" argument for
> AC_TRY_RUN, such as a compile/link-time test

I suppose.  I prefer configure to just fail in that case, myself.
I don't want a random, and perhaps incorrect for my platform, default.

> > 3. AC_TRY_RUN lets the user specify how to run code on the target,
> >    e.g. with a --with-target-run=foo.sh option, where foo.sh is
> >    a script that runs the given command remotely, e.g. via ssh.
> >    (By default, configure would assume you can't run code on the target
> >    when cross-compiling, just like now.)
> 
> BTW, did terminology change? ...

Sorry, I got confused.  (And I think that kept you from reading my
suggestion properly.)  Here it is, corrected:

3. AC_TRY_RUN lets the user specify how to run code on the target,
   e.g. with a --with-try-run=foo.sh option, where foo.sh is
   a script that runs the given command remotely, e.g. via ssh.
   (By default, configure would assume you can't run code on the target
   when cross-compiling, just like now.)

Does that make more sense?

- Dan