From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6073 invoked by alias); 6 Dec 2002 17:05:15 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 6040 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 17:05:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO gash2.peakpeak.com) (207.174.178.17) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 17:05:11 -0000 Received: from fleche.redhat.com (tq0111.peakpeak.com [207.174.177.111]) by gash2.peakpeak.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA18807; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 10:05:03 -0700 Received: by fleche.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6B7DB4F8056; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 10:03:16 -0700 (MST) To: Zack Weinberg Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, binutils@sources.redhat.com, newlib@sources.redhat.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Update to current automake/autoconf/libtool versions. References: <20021205223538.GA24616@doctormoo> <87adjk83ce.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com> From: Tom Tromey Reply-To: tromey@redhat.com X-Attribution: Tom X-Zippy: I'm also against BODY-SURFING!! Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 10:21:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <87adjk83ce.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com> Message-ID: <87smxb9j1o.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2002-12/txt/msg00230.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Zack" == Zack Weinberg writes: Zack> Someone on the autoconf team knew about this and tried to help out by Zack> providing an undocumented macro called AC_NO_EXECUTABLES: Zack> # FIXME: The GCC team has specific needs which the current Autoconf Zack> # framework cannot solve elegantly. This macro implements a dirty Zack> # hack until Autoconf is abble to provide the services its users Zack> # needs. Zack> They are only executed in a native compilation, but that's not good Zack> enough for AC_NO_EXECUTABLES. Presumably if AC_NO_EXECUTABLES exists solely for the use of gcc, then it could be changed to do what gcc actually requires. Tom