On Thu Sep 13 02:16:12 2007, ptc wrote: > > > Applied the patch with some modifications so that it runs > correctly on > > > Windows in r21212. Tested on Linux x86, Windows and Cygwin. > > > > But did you actually address any of my objections? For example, do > you > > now pay attention to exit codes? Do cc_build and cc_run now have > exit > > codes? > > The short answer here is: no. However attention to exit codes, and > exit codes from cc_build and cc_run are separate issues, aren't they?
Actually, I thought I might as well implement exit codes from C<cc_build> and see if i could improve C<cc_run>. See r21257 for details. C<cc_run> already returns the slurped text from the relevant calls within itself, so returning an error code might not be a good thing (maybe the sub needs to be reimplemented). C<cc_build> now returns an exit code. In my earlier commit (getting Configure.pl to die more gracefully when the compiler doesn't work) explicit C<exit 1;> statements are used so that exiting is forced and exit codes from C<_run_command> are observed. Does that help answer your objections? Paul
