Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > So I am back to something I raised some time ago: why the heck do we > have to compile to recognize Mingw etc.? Can't we just uname? I'll second that notion. :^) One argument for using the output of uname in some form instead of the current scheme is that the Cygwin test (at least) will fail if not using GCC as the compiler. I'm using MSVC++ cl.exe now, and the Cygwin check gives me a false negative because it's checking for the current compiler to define __CYGWIN__. (BTW, isn't it bad style of Autoconf to need to check for Cygwin, Mingw and EMX OS/2 in the first place? I can see the result is used in the AC_EXEEXT check -- but this macro is fubar anyhow and in bad need of a rewrite.) Regards, Morten
- Re: AC_PROG_CC not working Morten Eriksen
- Re: AC_PROG_CC not working Akim Demaille
- Re: AC_PROG_CC not working Akim Demaille
- Re: AC_PROG_CC not working Pavel Roskin
- Re: AC_PROG_CC not working Akim Demaille
- Re: AC_PROG_CC not working Peter Eisentraut
- Re: AC_PROG_CC not working Pavel Roskin
- Re: AC_PROG_CC not working Alexandre Oliva
- Re: AC_PROG_CC not working Akim Demaille
- Re: AC_PROG_CC not working Akim Demaille
- Re: AC_PROG_CC not working Morten Eriksen
- Re: AC_PROG_CC not working Akim Demaille
- Re: AC_PROG_CC not working Thomas E. Dickey
- Re: AC_PROG_CC not working Akim Demaille
- Re: AC_PROG_CC not working Bob Friesenhahn
- Re: AC_PROG_CC not working Akim Demaille
- Re: AC_PROG_CC not working Gary V. Vaughan
- Re: AC_PROG_CC not working Akim Demaille
- Re: AC_PROG_CC not working Gary V. Vaughan
- Re: AC_PROG_CC not working Peter Eisentraut
- Re: AC_PROG_CC not working Morten Eriksen