[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Building prog first
From: |
Reuben Thomas |
Subject: |
Re: Building prog first |
Date: |
Tue, 23 Mar 2010 16:55:20 +0000 |
On 23 March 2010 10:15, Steffen Dettmer <address@hidden> wrote:
>> This illustrates a weirdness of autotools: poor support for
>> installing interpreted languages, and also conversely for
>> build-time compiled programs.
>
> Yes, also for coffee-cooking there is poor support only. :-)
Sure, but autotools is for building programs, not for making coffee.
> I don't think build-time compiled C programs shall be suppored
> while cross compiling. I think it already is complex enough.
> Otherwise you had to do all checks twice and end up in many
> variables with confusing names, and those who are not
> cross-compiling probably accidently will mix them.
On the contrary, this is a very useful feature (why should one not be
able to build host programs when cross-compiling?) for which support
in autoconf would simplify developers' life (even the ad-hoc support
in binutils that I mentioned is pretty easy to use).
>> > I though of perl, but (A), i don't like slow tools,
>
> (I think Perl is fast)
Me too, the above assertion was not written by me! You missed the
author line at the top from the original author of these double-quoted
comments.
--
http://rrt.sc3d.org
- Re: Building prog first, (continued)
- Re: Building prog first, Steffen Dettmer, 2010/03/22
- Re: Building prog first, Steffen Dettmer, 2010/03/22
- Re: Building prog first, Russell Shaw, 2010/03/22
- Re: Building prog first, Reuben Thomas, 2010/03/22
- Re: Building prog first, Ralf Wildenhues, 2010/03/23
- Re: Building prog first, Reuben Thomas, 2010/03/23
- Re: Building prog first, Steffen Dettmer, 2010/03/23
- Re: Building prog first, Russell Shaw, 2010/03/23
- Re: Building prog first,
Reuben Thomas <=
- Re: Building prog first, Steffen Dettmer, 2010/03/24