Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 25 Apr 2000, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > Perhaps the mere presence of --host (or NOOPT) could give a gentle hint > that cross-compilation is at least tolerated (but not forced). After all, > why are you specifying it otherwise? The converse is of course not true. Because you may want to provide an alias for the host (native) system. -- Paul
- Re: Is this a bug in autoconf? (patch included) Pavel Roskin
- Re: Is this a bug in autoconf? (patch included) Ian Lance Taylor
- Re: Is this a bug in autoconf? (patch included) Alexandre Oliva
- Re: Is this a bug in autoconf? (patch included) Ian Lance Taylor
- Re: Is this a bug in autoconf? (patch included) Alexandre Oliva
- Re: Is this a bug in autoconf? (patch included) Pavel Roskin
- Re: Is this a bug in autoconf? (patch included) Ian Lance Taylor
- Re: Is this a bug in autoconf? (patch included) Pavel Roskin
- Re: Is this a bug in autoconf? (patch included) Ian Lance Taylor
- Re: Is this a bug in autoconf? (patch included) Peter Eisentraut
- Re: Is this a bug in autoconf? (patch included) Paul Berrevoets
- Re: Is this a bug in autoconf? (patch included) Alexandre Oliva
- Re: Is this a bug in autoconf? (patch included) Ian Lance Taylor
- Re: Is this a bug in autoconf? (patch included) Christopher Seawood
- Re: Is this a bug in autoconf? (patch included) Tom Tromey
- Re: Is this a bug in autoconf? (patch included) Akim Demaille
- Re: Is this a bug in autoconf? (patch included) Akim Demaille
- Re: Is this a bug in autoconf? (patch included) Pavel Roskin
- Re: Is this a bug in autoconf? (patch included) Peter Eisentraut
- Re: Is this a bug in autoconf? (patch included) Tom Tromey
- Re: Is this a bug in autoconf? (patch included) Akim Demaille