I like this idea. I just started trying to use autoconf to do cross
compiles yesterday and I can tell you that it is VERY hard to figure
out which of the AC_CANONICAL_{BUILD, TARGET, HOST, SYSTEM} macros one
should be using. The docs did not help much, there was a cryptic
note about only needing HOST and the docs also said AC_CANONICAL_SYSTEM
would not be needed unless the tool is part of a compiler that was
crossing itself. It would be a lot more simple if we just had on
AC_CANONICAL_SYSTEM macro. That way, the scripts would check
for any of the --target, --host, or --build arguments instead
of the current approach which is to silently fail unless the
BUILD, TARGET, or HOST macro had been run.
Mo Dejong
Red Hat Inc.
> This is why I would like to reiterate a proposal I made: get rid of
> AC_CANONICAL_{BUILD, TARGET, HOST}, and provide only
> AC_CANONICAL_SYSTEM.
>
> I don't think maintainers need to ask themselves the question of which
> of these they should run, I don't think the slight speed improvement
> should be considered. So my proposal is that all these former names
> become just an AC_REQUIRE of AC_CANONICAL_SYSTEM, to be guaranteed to
> remain compatible, and we just document the latter. And we move into
> it the --help portion.
>
> How does it sound?
>
> Akim
