On Jun 28, 2000, Bernard Dautrevaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What I do not fully understand is why the patch saying that if --build and
> --host are passed and equal we are not cross compiling and modifying the top
> cygnus configure script to be backward compatible and to pass both --build
> and --host to all sub-configures is not enough.
I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Anyway, Cygnus' configure
does pass --build and --host to sub-configures.
> After all that only request that the top cygnus configure be up to
> date...
That's something that can't be required from users that download GCC,
GDB and binutils and want to build them together.
> However I will buy any backward compatible version as soon as we are able to
> discover, in the normal cases, that we are cross-compiling by just looking
> at arguments
We can't, if the user specifies only --host. In this case, we'll now
still guess --build (with a non-negligible probability of getting an
error if the user hasn't set CC_FOR_BUILD nor HOST_CC), but, since
the user isn't required to pass a canonicalized name in --host, and
there's some possibility that --build differs from a canonical guess,
we won't compare a guessed build with a given or canonicalized host;
instead, we'll fall back to the traditional approach of testing the
compiler.
> it is a lot more intuitive to say:
> ./configure --host=yyy
> ./configure --build=xxx --host=yyy
Both of these are supposed to work as expected now. However, guessing
--build may fail when cross compiling; in this case, it may have to be
specified explicitly in the command line.
--
Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer aoliva@{cygnus.com, redhat.com}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist *Please* write to mailing lists, not to me
