Re: [toplevel] Gas install name problem from autoconf 2.5x

Ian Lance Taylor
2003-09-03T16:12:36Z

Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com> writes:

> Well, up to now, it didn't make any difference. We could use the third
> option:
> - Don't pass $target unless it was given on the command line.
>
> This is definitely a good idea, but I was going to do that after most
> directories had converted.

I think that to make things work with the current autoconf you need to
know which autoconf is being used in the subdirectory.

> Enough people configure native compilers
> now by giving all of build/host/target that I'm not very happy with the
> solution.

Well, that's a problem.

> How do we feel about migrating towards the new autoconf definitions -
> i.e. anything with --host is cross-compiled, anything with --target is
> a cross-compiler.

I've never felt particularly good about it, but the autoconf
maintainers seem determined about it. I think our choices are either
to adopt their scheme, or to use a patched autoconf.

Looking at the autoconf archives, I see that I grumbled about the
change to --program-prefix/--program-transform-name before:
http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/autoconf/2002-01/msg00053.html
Here is the rest of the thread:
http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/autoconf/2002-02/msg00060.html
Basically the autoconf maintainers say the new way is right, and
they're sorry that people have to change.

I don't know where the original discussion about this was.

Ian