On Dec 28, 2002, Doug Evans wrote: > Alexandre Oliva writes: >> On Dec 28, 2002, Nathanael Nerode wrote: >> >> > Tested on i686-pc-linux-gnu with a Canadian cross. Now if the >> > prefixed tools can't be found (and the unprefixed tools are incorrect), >> > the tool values default to blank, which will cause entirely different >> > errors. (Heh.) >> >> Hmm... I don't quite like a blank default. I'd much rather default >> to -, since this at least gives the user the >> opportunity to adjust PATH after configure, and gives more of an idea >> of what's going on. > Agreed! Ok, this is what I'm checking in, after verifying that it does the right thing on native, cross, host-x-host and host-x-build set ups, namely, if host/target == build, default to the program name without prefix, otherwise prefix it with the host/target tool prefix. I predict we're going to have a *lot* of trouble when we switch to autoconf 2.5x in the top level. The way build/host/target_alias is defined has changed, and we're going to have to duplicate the logic autoconf uses for defaulting system names to pass the right arguments down. Eeek :-( I knew that right when the changes were introduced in autoconf, but I couldn't stop them, and then I had forgotten.