[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Two problems for autoconf(1.NEC SX 2.Cray)

From: Jeroen van den Muyzenberg
Subject: Re: Two problems for autoconf(1.NEC SX 2.Cray)
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 22:39:57 +1100 (EST)

On Mon, 25 Feb 2002, Akim Demaille wrote:

> >>>>> "Paul" == Paul Eggert <address@hidden> writes:
> >> Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2002 21:07:10 +1100 (EST) From: Jeroen van den
> >> Muyzenberg <address@hidden>
> >> > > Seems to me that there has been a great deal of effort into
> >> dealing with > > "brain-damaged" compilers. Why stop now?
> >> >
> >> > Because the code is working now.  In the case of the other
> >> compilers I > mentioned, the resulting code didn't work.
> >>
> >> Well, some of us are willing to put in the effort.
> Paul> That's fine, and you can certainly talk us into further
> Paul> improvements here, but we need something that continues to work
> Paul> with those brain-damaged compilers (as well as with the Cray
> Paul> compiler, which is merely irritating).  Simply checking the
> Paul> compiler's exit status isn't enough, unfortunately.
> Also, please include exact reference to the version of Autoconf you
> are running, as things have changed in this area.

Sorry to sound grumpy here, but autoconf version would only really be
useful if there was some systematic way of making projects use it. My
experience with porting has been that whatever version of autoconf worked
at the start is still the version currently used for that application.

Good example is OpenLDAP, autoconf used there recognised (incorrectly) our
Cray as a C90 ('twas good enough). Recent versions of autoconf have dropped
that. Sort of funny, since so many legacy systems are still supported, and
begs the question - why was it dropped?

(well, it may or may not make a good example, just my latest frustration

Akim, I don't know the exact answer to whatever version Len was using to
prompt this thread. Len?

Now I must say that I have not really followed autoconf's history. I am
suprised that there is (and I could be interpreting this incorrectly) some
resistance to including new architecture/OS templates.


Jeroen van den Muyzenberg
CSIRO Mathematical and Information Sciences
CSIRO/Bureau of Meteorology -
High Performance Computing and Communications Centre
Ph: +61 3 9669 8111 Fax: +61 3 9669 8112

reply via email to

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