Re: compile problem

[Gary V. Vaughan]

Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
>>>>"Gary" == Gary V Vaughan <address@hidden> writes:
>  
> [...]
> 
>  Gary> So does that simply mean that libtool objects can be correctly built
>  Gary> as subdir-objects without AM_PROG_CC_C_O?  Sorry to bug you, just
>  Gary> making sure I understand why you made the patch the way you did...
> 
> The purpose of AM_PROG_CC_C_O is to replace CC by the `compile'
> script which emulates a compiler that supports `-c -o' when the
> real CC does not.  As you pointed out, libtool already supplies such
> emulation, so `compile' is never needed when compiling lo files.

Okay.  But for a project built with `make -j', we still need AM_PROG_CC_C_O
and _LT_COMPILER_C_O to understand each others' locks :-(

> [...]
> 
>  Gary> Meant to ask, why doesn't AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE (conditionally if
>  Gary> necessary) simply invoke AM_PROG_CC_C_O?
> 
> We know it's needed only after processing the Makefile.am files.

Why not invoke it anyway?

Cheers,
        Gary.
-- 
Gary V. Vaughan      ())_.  address@hidden,gnu.org}
Research Scientist   ( '/   http://tkd.kicks-ass.net
GNU Hacker           / )=   http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool
Technical Author   `(_~)_   http://sources.redhat.com/autobook

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature