Re: cross-compiling philosophy

[Guido Draheim]

Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Oct 2003, Larry Doolittle wrote:
>
> > > would be responsible for writing the bit of Tcl code required to
> > > interface to the target.
> >
> > I have never used DejaGNU.  I think a lot of embedded development
> > systems can download executables and run them, one way or another.
>
>
> You seem to have a very constrained/idealistic view of an "embedded"
> system.  Cygnus developed DejaGNU to be able to handle just about any
> embedded system which is accessible via a serial connection or
> network.

After thinking it over a little, hmmm, we have some defined means to
override some test results, what ways do we have to override the
means to do runtime checks? I know some that override the compiler
and flags to be used, what about test snippets in ac_run style? Isn't
it the case that today we let stuff compile via a lot of indirections
but the actual test run invokation is blunt right through shell exec.
... So, what's so hard to test-and-run-through a wrapper script
denoted by a shell var (in the crosscompile state) somewhere in

 AC_DEFUN([AC_RUN_IFELSE],
[AC_LANG_COMPILER_REQUIRE()dnl
m4_ifval([$4], [],
         [AC_DIAGNOSE([cross],
                     [$0 called without default to allow cross compiling])])dnl
if test "$cross_compiling" = yes; then
  m4_default([$4],
           [AC_MSG_FAILURE([cannot run test program while cross compiling])])
else
  _AC_RUN_IFELSE($@)
fi])

In other words, the presented `framework` might be specific, but
the hook should be there anyhow. Right?