Alexandre Oliva - Re: Updating top-level autoconf to 2.59 (original) (raw)
This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.orgmailing list for the GCC project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
- From: Alexandre Oliva
- To: John Cowan
- Cc: Michael Eager , Ian Lance Taylor , "Joseph S. Myers" , Daniel Jacobowitz , Paolo Bonzini , gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, binutils at sourceware dot org, newlib at sourceware dot org
- Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 03:17:36 -0200
- Subject: Re: Updating top-level autoconf to 2.59
- References: <45CADD5E.404@lu.unisi.ch> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0702081239290.12368@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <45CB1C16.10407@lu.unisi.ch> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0702081251340.12368@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <20070208131821.GA2860@nevyn.them.org> <45CB28BB.8050805@lu.unisi.ch> <20070208141800.GA6649@nevyn.them.org> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0702081442160.25268@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <m37iuslmod.fsf@localhost.localdomain> <45CB5453.3080109@eagercon.com> <20070208172424.GB25311@mercury.ccil.org>
On Feb 8, 2007, John Cowan cowan@ccil.org wrote:
But I agree that it shouldn't matter whether a build, host, or target switch is specified or defaulted; what should matter is the equality or inequality of the value of those switches.
Actually, no. Being able to tell configure to pretend it's doing a cross build, even though it's a native build, is a nice test tool.
-- Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/ FSF Latin America Board Member http://www.fsfla.org/ Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org} Free Software Evangelist oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
- References:
- Re: Updating top-level autoconf to 2.59
* From: Paolo Bonzini - Re: Updating top-level autoconf to 2.59
* From: Joseph S. Myers - Re: Updating top-level autoconf to 2.59
* From: Paolo Bonzini - Re: Updating top-level autoconf to 2.59
* From: Joseph S. Myers - Re: Updating top-level autoconf to 2.59
* From: Daniel Jacobowitz - Re: Updating top-level autoconf to 2.59
* From: Paolo Bonzini - Re: Updating top-level autoconf to 2.59
* From: Daniel Jacobowitz - Re: Updating top-level autoconf to 2.59
* From: Joseph S. Myers - Re: Updating top-level autoconf to 2.59
* From: Ian Lance Taylor - Re: Updating top-level autoconf to 2.59
* From: Michael Eager - Re: Updating top-level autoconf to 2.59
* From: John Cowan
- Re: Updating top-level autoconf to 2.59
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |