On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 11:26 PM, Peter Rosin <p...@lysator.liu.se> wrote: > The web has a couple of different forked versions of cccl. What is > the "upstream" for that script? There is ancient support for some > version of cccl in libtool, but I didn't get it to work with any > version of cccl that I found (some things might have worked, but > there were loads of failures for simple things in the libtool > testsuites. I have forgotten the details so don't ask...). So, I > didn't want to create yet another fork of cccl, and instead fixed > the 'compile' script in Automake to handle the bits that must be > handled by the build tools (and taught libtool to deal with cl > natively). What I didn't do was add all sorts of options to > 'compile' to make cl look like gcc, because that way lies madness. > Packages aiming for portability shouldn't assume gcc in the first > place. End result, you have to feed optimization options and such > in the way cl expects them. > > There is also the 'ar-lib' script that does the bare minimum to > present a posixy archiver interface (albeit incomplete) to Microsoft > lib, in a similar manner that 'compile' makes cl understand the > -l and -L options (and a few others). > > All in all, I regularly use these scripts to build packages with > cl, and the configure.ac/Makefile.am of those packages need not > do special things to have it all work. > > A typical configure invocation might be (from an MSYS shell): > > .../configure CC="cl -nologo" CFLAGS=-MD LD=link NM="dumpbin -symbols" \ > AR="/home/peda/automake/lib/ar-lib lib" STRIP=: RANLIB=: \ > --enable-dependency-tracking > > configure.ac needs to have AM_PROG_CC_C_O which might not be one of > the most common macros, but that's certainly not too bad. And when > the mentioned branch in Automake git is merged I imagine there will be > a macro named something like AM_PROG_AR that will make it sufficient > to say AR=lib to configure, instead of pointing at 'ar-lib' explicitly. > > I don't think cccl is the future, I see it as the past. It's > simply not needed when the needed bits are already in 'compile'. > > It's a bit sad to see all the effort going into writing private > scripts wrapping cl into something that looks like gcc, when the > effort could be spent making autotools just work instead.
I'd be happy to give those scripts a try when I get some time. I guess I have to download/install autoconf/automake/libtool from git. Anything else? When you want to compile a package, I guess you then have to rerun autoconf/automake to get updated compilation scripts? When configure.ac does not contain then AM_PROG_CC_C_O macro, what do you do? Add it manually? For instance I checked PCRE code (http://vcs.pcre.org/viewvc/code/trunk/configure.ac?revision=666&view=markup) and couldn't find that macro. Michael.
