autoconf
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: AC_OBJEXT again


From: Akim Demaille
Subject: Re: AC_OBJEXT again
Date: 12 Dec 2000 10:19:19 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.0807 (Gnus v5.8.7) XEmacs/21.1 (Channel Islands)

| On Dec  7, 2000, Akim Demaille <address@hidden> wrote:
| >>>>>> "Morten" == Morten Eriksen <address@hidden> writes:
| Morten> Akim Demaille <address@hidden> writes:
| >>> OBJEXT and EXEEXT [...] define precisely what they are (build, or
| >>> host?), [...]
| 
| Morten> Just wanted to add my 0.02 Kroner: after pondering this issue
| Morten> for a while, I tend to believe we should first and foremost
| Morten> view them as characteristics of the _compiler_ -- screw
| Morten> looking at the host and build system. :-)
| 
| > That's what I call a build characteristic.
| 
| Wrong.  The compiler is supposed to follow conventions of the host,
| not of the build machine.

Well, I suppose this means Morten is right to be willing to introduce
some more vocabulary.  Why do you say it's host related?  Because
indeed when we ask something from the compiler, when it's a cross
compiler, it talks about the host machine.

But in the present case, what extensions a cross compiler is using,
IMHO, is not necessarily directly linked to the extensions of the host
platform.  If, when cross-compiling to Cygwin or whatever, gcc using
`.o', that's fine, we just don't care.  That's why I meant to call
this a build property: it explains how the processes run on `build'
are.  The compiler is just one such program.

Then there are the environments that, when cross-compiling, are
pushing the host preferences during the build process.  That's where
the confusion is (or, if not confusion, just disagreement on the
vocabulary to use).



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]