Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf.Wildenhues@xxxxxx> writes:
> In a cross compile setup, configure tests that run programs
> cannot be executed; in that case, provide pessimistic default
> values.
>
> Bug reported by Julius Naperkowski.
> ---
>
>> I can post a patch to add sane default settings for AC_RUN_IFELSE in
>> cross compile setups, this weekend.
>
> configure.ac | 3 +++
> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
> index 363547c..4a208d4 100644
> --- a/configure.ac
> +++ b/configure.ac
> @@ -360,6 +360,7 @@ AC_RUN_IFELSE(
> else if (strcmp(buf, "12345"))
> return 2;]])],
> [ac_cv_c_c99_format=yes],
> + [ac_cv_c_c99_format=no],
> [ac_cv_c_c99_format=no])
> ])
> if test $ac_cv_c_c99_format = no; then
This one probably is Ok, but...
> @@ -380,6 +381,7 @@ AC_RUN_IFELSE(
> FILE *f = fopen(".", "r");
> return f && fread(&c, 1, 1, f)]])],
> [ac_cv_fread_reads_directories=no],
> + [ac_cv_fread_reads_directories=yes],
> [ac_cv_fread_reads_directories=yes])
> ])
> if test $ac_cv_fread_reads_directories = yes; then
I am not quite sure if this is an improvement ...
> @@ -414,6 +416,7 @@ AC_RUN_IFELSE(
> if (snprintf(buf, 3, "%s", "12345") != 5
> || strcmp(buf, "12")) return 1]])],
> [ac_cv_snprintf_returns_bogus=no],
> + [ac_cv_snprintf_returns_bogus=yes],
> [ac_cv_snprintf_returns_bogus=yes])
> ])
> if test $ac_cv_snprintf_returns_bogus = yes; then
... nor this one.
Is there a way to say something like "I'll autodetect as much as I can
without running tests, but please tell me these characteristics of the
target system manually" and leave the resulting config.mak.autogen in a
shape that will guarantee compilation failure until the missing ones are
supplied by config.mak?
The thing is, I am not convinced that it is desirable to be able to build
a possibly suboptimal binary in a cross compilation environment, without
being told in what aspect of the resulting binary is suboptimal. I'd
rather see a build system that honestly tells me what information it needs
but couldn't find, so that I would know I have a chance to help it.
Of course, suggesting a pessimistic default that can result in suboptimal
but correct result would be a good thing to help the user help the build.
I just think it is a good idea to tell the user we are giving such hint a
bit more loudly to draw attention.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
