Re: autoconf + automake support for MSVC

[Stefano Lattarini]

On Wednesday 19 October 2011, Peter Rosin wrote:
> Stefano Lattarini skrev 2011-09-03 09:41:
> > For what concerns this: are you willing to re-submit your patch
> > series about AM_PROG_AR to automake-patches? I will try hard to
> > look into it, if you are willing to do the required testing and
> > to patiently explain to me the details I won't undertand (and
> > be warned that there will probably be many of them, since I'm a
> > total Windows noob).
> 
> It is not a patch series, it is single patch that adds a new
> macro that is modeled after AM_PROG_CC_C_O, some tests to catch
> regressions and a plethora of trivial updates to the testsuite.
>
But then we should also add a new `windows' (or better `msvc'?) warning
category, so that we won't force users not interested in MSVC portability
to choose between a mandated use of the new macro (which would probably
be perceived as gratuitous bloating) and the forsaking of all the
portability warnings (which is bad, bad, bad).  I don't care whether
this new warning category is introduced by a preparatory patch or by a
follow-up one, as long as it's in place before a merge to `maint' takes
place.

> Ah, and the little portability warning of course, triggered when
> building libraries w/o AM_PROG_AR in configure...
>
Yep, see above.  And today I agree with you that this warning should be
enabled by `-Wall'.

> Anyway, I have rebased the patch on top of the current msvc branch
> and have added fixes for fallout in a few new tests etc.
> 
> The testsuite is ccccrrrraaaaaawwwwllllliiinnnnngggggg along, I'll
> post the updated patch as soon as it finishes satisfactory. I just
> wanted to post this in case it improves the odds of making the
> release...
>
I'd give at least three weeks before the 1.11.2 beta(s), so there no
need to hurry excessively.  But thanks for the heads-up.

Regards,
  Stefano