Hello Ralf,
Thanks a lot for your feedback!
On Mon, 2 Aug 2010 07:17:36 +0200
Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf.Wildenhues@xxxxxx> wrote:
> * Thomas Petazzoni wrote on Mon, Aug 02, 2010 at 03:33:53AM CEST:
> > So the ability of sharing the cache between execution of
> > different configure scripts is a documented feature. Is it just
> > that in reality it doesn't work that well ?
>
> You should be able to modify both configure scripts in a way so that
> it works again; and in this particular example it should be done.
> Getting this approach to scale can be a lot of work though.
Is this approach "officially" supported by autoconf ? If I fix one of
the configure.{in,ac} script and try to get the change merged upstream,
it's an important argument to know if the change is done to comply with
a general rule of configure.{in,ac} and not a specific hack.
Moreover, as Steffen asked later in the thread, in the particular case
I've presented in the original mail of this thread, what would be the
correct fix ?
I have also other cases of configure cache misuse by two independent
packages. I'm often able to track down the cause of the problem, but
I'm not autoconf-ed enough to know which is the correct fix. May I
present those other cases to the list ?
Thanks again for your inputs,
Thomas
--
Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com
_______________________________________________
Autoconf mailing list
Autoconf@xxxxxxx
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
