Re: Is this a bug in autoconf? (patch included)

Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 25 Apr 2000, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > Perhaps the mere presence of --host (or NOOPT) could give a gentle hint > that cross-compilation is at least tolerated (but not forced). After all, > why are you specifying it otherwise? The converse is of course not true. Becaus

Re: Java for Autoconf (was: TODO list for release?)

Mo DeJong wrote: > The thing I have noticed about open source projects is that the > only way to get things done is to decide on a goal and then do > 99% of the work needed to reach that goal. Other folks are happy to > make comments on the work you did or polish up the 1% you did wrong, > but no

Re: --host => cross breaks GCC builds

Felix Lee wrote: > Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > I'm sorry, but I disagree. The only sane and simple definition of > > cross-compilation is when --host is specified. > > so what do you do if config.guess is wrong and you want to > specify the --host string exactly, but you don't want a

Re: Repost: Variable expansion

>From what you gave ... configure.in: AC_INIT(test.in) PACKAGE=test CP_PREFIX=/usr/local CP_LIBDIR=$CP_PREFIX/lib CP_PKGLIBDIR=$CP_LIBDIR/$PACKAGE AC_SUBST(CP_PREFIX) AC_SUBST(CP_LIBDIR) AC_SUBST(CP_PKGLIBDIR) AC_OUTPUT(test) test.in: @CP_PREFIX@ @CP_LIBDIR@ @CP_PKGLIBDIR@ $ ./configure creatin

Re: Repost: Variable expansion

Thanks! This will happen if you use CP_LIBDIR='$CP_PREFIX/lib' but not if you use CP_LIBDIR=$CP_PREFIX/lib or CP_LIBDIR="$CP_PREFIX/lib" -- Paul > > > Paul Berrevoets wrote: > > > > From what you gave ... > > > > configure.in: &

Re: AS_DIRNAME and expr

27;a\(\) 0 solaris$ linux$ expr foo : '\(bar\)' \| a : 'a\(\) linux$ hpux$ expr foo : '\(bar\)' \| a : 'a\(\) hpux$ Sorry if I got the wrong impression. -- Paul Berrevoets David Morgan wrote: > > I meant that when `:' fails, it returns `0' instead of

Re: Where did the Cygwin and Mingw checks go?

d then find > the obj extension by looking for files named conftest.*, > filtering out conftest.c and then using whatever was left > (either conftest.o or conftest.obj). That might have changed, > but it seems to be the way I remember it. This is ok for AC_OBJEXT, but for AC_EXEEXT pl

Re: Where did the Cygwin and Mingw checks go? (patch suggestion)

quot; wrote: > On Wed, Nov 22, 2000 at 03:50:58PM -0500, Paul Berrevoets wrote: > : This is ok for AC_OBJEXT, but for AC_EXEEXT please take into consideration that on > : UWIN (which uses a cc wrapper for MSVC), the compiler also generates a .pdb file, > : which if you don't fi

Re: Where did the Cygwin and Mingw checks go? (patch suggestion)

"Lars J. Aas" wrote: > : Your technique needs to be modified somewhat because you are not using file > : globbing for 'conftest.o' and 'conftest.obj'. > > That is because I tested for the existence of the file in the loop. Clearly ... my bad :-( -- Paul

Re: AS_DIRNAME and expr

> > expr '' solaris$ expr '' solaris$ expr foo : bar \| '' 0 solaris$ expr foo : bar \| this this hp-ux$ expr '' hp-ux$ expr foo : bar \| '' hp-ux$ expr foo : bar \| this this -- Paul Berrevoets