>>>>> "Alexandre" == Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Alexandre> On Dec 12, 2000, Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> What you describe is precisely what I meant by `build': there is
>> not a single reference to the host in what you describe.
Alexandre> Nope, the output of the compiler follows conventions of the
Alexandre> host machine, so it's a characteristic of the host.
Come on Alexandre! I agree the cross compiler has to use the host
ints, chars etc. But I doubt all the cross compilers in the world do
propagate the right extension by default.
There is the extensions the compiler will use by default. Call it a
compiler feature if you feel better with it, but at least there is
nothing _necessarily_ linked to host here. It's a build feature, a
feature measured on the build machine: the default name of the
executables created by the compiler.
Now there is the extensions used by the host.
If the cross-compiler foo is selecting by default the names
corresponding to the host, then fine.
If the cross-compiler bar running under Unix still produces non .exe
by default, then we have to over ride its preference.
>> Because some people might use a cross-compiler which produces foo,
>> not foo.exe, while the machine on which the executable will be
>> installed needs to be installed as foo.exe.
Alexandre> Such a cross-compiler would be a broken compiler. I don't
Alexandre> know of any such cross-compilers, so this point is moot.
Ah!!! Then you are telling me we just don't care about __CYGWIN32__
etc. Then that's fine with me, that's all I wanted to hear. All we
want to know is the default extensions used by the compiler. Fine.
