-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 According to Steffen DETTMER on 9/2/2008 3:16 AM: > Hi, > > we use autoconf (and automake) with self-written configure.in/ac > scripts since a long time but probably wrong in several aspects. > > I hope this is the right place to ask, otherwise please tell! Yes, this is the right place. > > If I understood correctly, passing --host in general enables > cross compiling. Yes (and you should also specify --build). > My question in short: > > How to correctly set mandatory default options like -isystem > and -nostdlib -lmylibc? The same as for non-cross-compilation: ./configure CC='my-cross-cc -nostdlib' CFLAGS='-isystem path/to/dir' \ LIBS='-lmylibc' In other words, ./configure should NOT encode these defaults (because they are not necessarily mandatory defaults for all users), rather, the user should be responsible for specifying them. > > We `defined' a name for this, lets say `arm-ingenico-elf_device' > (the value of `device' depends) and use this in configure.in case > statements to select options. Is this wrong and how would it be > correct? In general, writing platform-name-specific tests in configure.ac (the name configure.in is obsolete) is not the autoconf way. Rather, you should test for features that a platform either provides or lacks, independently of the platform's name. Unfortunately, for cross-compilation, this doesn't always work (since you can't run test binaries, and not all features can be tested solely at link time), but even then, you are better off using only names provided in config.guess (patches to add host triplets to config.guess should be sent to the list mentioned in that file). > How to check compilers/environments with mandatory parameters? I still think that the easiest way is writing your cross-compiler in such a way that you don't need those parameters to be mandatory. In other words, write a wrapper script that does all the work: #!/bin/sh exec real-cross-cc -isystem path/to/dir "$@" and install it on PATH ahead of the cross-compiler. > > Another way could be to have arm-ingenico-elf_device-gcc etc > being a wrapper passing -isystem etc, but I think this is ugly. How is that ugly? It actually sounds the cleanest to me, because you can then use the wrapper as your cross-compiler without having to worry about all the details of how to make it work. > > This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. It is considered poor netiquette to post email to a publicly archived mailing list which contains an unenforceable disclaimer. Some people refuse to reply to such mail on principle. - -- Don't work too hard, make some time for fun as well! Eric Blake ebb9@xxxxxxx -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin) Comment: Public key at home.comcast.net/~ericblake/eblake.gpg Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkjC3W4ACgkQ84KuGfSFAYD13ACfavqbjdLAk5DtsvKF97HETmIV GQcAn382v3WlEBDojyVM2M5TlM6uE1l1 =iXYF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
