Hi David, and sorry for the long delay, * David Byron wrote on Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 08:18:35PM CET: > On Friday September 4th, 2009, Eric Blake wrote: > > According to David Byron on 8/14/2009 1:57 PM: > > > I'm not sure whether this is something I'm doing wrong > > > or something wrong with automake, autoconf or libtool. > > > At the moment I'm leaning to autoconf + automake. > > > > compile is maintained by automake, so I've redirected your > > patch there. FWIW, it looks okay to me, but Ralf will > > have to chime in. As David already correctly noted, merely changing the compile script is not sufficient; it would also need some AM_PROG_CXX_C_O macro. I have some unfinished patches from long ago for that (C++ and Fortran) for both Automake and Autoconf (which also needs likewise additions). However, I never finished them, for they'd only really help some SCO C++ compiler, and a few Fortran compilers, but it still wouldn't help with MSVC: first, it *has* an /Fo$object switch, then there are still lots of other things that won't work, like /Fe$executable. For most of these issues, you can use a wrapper script like cccl, or cegcc, or a couple of others I forgot now. But then, you don't need above changes, and the least you want on w32 with slow fork emulations is another wrapper script (the `compile' one) sitting in between make, the compiler, possibly libtool, and a wrapper script or compiler. I'm not sure about the best way to proceed here, or what level of emulation to add to `compile', but going just one step seems less attractive than the current status quo or going even further. Hope that helps. Cheers, Ralf _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
