[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: $CC and intel icc/ecc compiler
From: |
Allan Sandfeld Jensen |
Subject: |
Re: $CC and intel icc/ecc compiler |
Date: |
Tue, 15 Apr 2003 13:29:49 +0200 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.5.9 |
On Thursday 10 April 2003 05:49, Robert Boehne wrote:
> Samuel,
>
> I should have seen this when the original patch was submitted, sorry
> I didn't notice. The patch you've posted should work. I'm checking
> it in, and if you still have trouble, let us know.
>
> Thanks!
>
The `basename $CC` part seems to have been lost in cvs-HEAD, and both patches
are missing in release-1-5.
`Allan
>
> Samuel Meder wrote:
> > On Wed, 2003-04-09 at 20:52, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> > > It seems to me that both the before and after code is incorrect. The
> > > reason why I say is is that $CC may contain the command plus some
> > > arguments which are required for it to behave in some consistent way.
> >
> > So it is naive to think that those things should go into CFLAGS? Off the
> > top of my head I can't think of a single scenario where I'd want them in
> > $CC rather than $CFLAGS. Do you have one?
> >
> > > This means that the if $CC is 'foo -bar' then
> > >
> > > case $CC in
> > > foo)
> > >
> > > will not match, but
> > >
> > > case $CC in
> > > foo*)
> > >
> > > will. Parsing out just the first word from the specification would
> > > solve the problem.
> >
> > I still maintain that you need `basename $CC` (basename does not strip
> > arguments on the systems I tried). I don't really care to argue about
> > the CC vs. CFLAGS issue (still curious about a example though) so I've
> > attached a patch that adds *s.
> >
> > /Sam
> >
> > > You should not expect that the user won't add compiler options to the
> > > base compiler name since this may be required to select a compiler
> > > version, target architecture, or some other global option which is
> > > best specified via the compiler specification.
> > >
> > > Bob
> > >
> > > On 9 Apr 2003, Samuel Meder wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2003-04-09 at 20:35, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, 9 Apr 2003, Charles Wilson wrote:
> > > > > > Only half paying attention, but doesn't this break an earlier
> > > > > > patch that allowed things like "-mno-cygwin" to be included in
> > > > > > the $CC variable? Or am I mis-remembering?
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes, it sounds like it does. It also would break important things
> > > > > like
> > > > >
> > > > > CC="gcc -V 3.1.1"
> > > > >
> > > > > which I happen to be using at the moment.
> > > >
> > > > Please read the patch. It changes
> > > >
> > > > linux*)
> > > > case $CC in
> > > > icc|ecc)
> > > > _LT_AC_TAGVAR(lt_prog_compiler_wl, $1)='-Wl,'
> > > > _LT_AC_TAGVAR(lt_prog_compiler_pic, $1)='-KPIC'
> > > > _LT_AC_TAGVAR(lt_prog_compiler_static, $1)='-static'
> > > > ;;
> > > > ccc)
> > > > _LT_AC_TAGVAR(lt_prog_compiler_wl, $1)='-Wl,'
> > > > # All Alpha code is PIC.
> > > > _LT_AC_TAGVAR(lt_prog_compiler_static, $1)='-non_shared'
> > > > ;;
> > > > esac
> > > > ;;
> > > > to
> > > >
> > > > linux*)
> > > > case `basename $CC` in
> > > > icc|ecc)
> > > > _LT_AC_TAGVAR(lt_prog_compiler_wl, $1)='-Wl,'
> > > > _LT_AC_TAGVAR(lt_prog_compiler_pic, $1)='-KPIC'
> > > > _LT_AC_TAGVAR(lt_prog_compiler_static, $1)='-static'
> > > > ;;
> > > > ccc)
> > > > _LT_AC_TAGVAR(lt_prog_compiler_wl, $1)='-Wl,'
> > > > # All Alpha code is PIC.
> > > > _LT_AC_TAGVAR(lt_prog_compiler_static, $1)='-non_shared'
> > > > ;;
> > > > esac
> > > > ;;
> > > >
> > > > If you are using gcc you will never hit this case statement. Also, a
> > > > quick grep -r on mno-cygwin gives no hits other than ChangeLog.1 and
> > > > mail/cygwin32. My understanding is that the option stripping that
> > > > libtool does has changed a little so it may not longer need special
> > > > processing. It should be orthogonal in any case.
> > > >
> > > > /Sam
> > > >
> > > > > Bob
> > > > > ======================================
> > > > > Bob Friesenhahn
> > > > > address@hidden
> > > > > http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen
> > >
> > > ======================================
> > > Bob Friesenhahn
> > > address@hidden
> > > http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Name: ChangeLog.patch
> > ChangeLog.patch Type: text/x-patch
> > Encoding: 7bit
> >
> > Name: libtool.patch
> > libtool.patch Type: text/x-patch
> > Encoding: 7bit
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > _______________________________________________
> > Libtool-patches mailing list
> > address@hidden
> > http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool-patches
>
> _______________________________________________
> Libtool mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
- $CC and intel icc/ecc compiler, Samuel Meder, 2003/04/09
- Re: $CC and intel icc/ecc compiler, Robert Boehne x238, 2003/04/09
- Re: $CC and intel icc/ecc compiler, Charles Wilson, 2003/04/09
- Re: $CC and intel icc/ecc compiler, Bob Friesenhahn, 2003/04/09
- Re: $CC and intel icc/ecc compiler, Samuel Meder, 2003/04/09
- Re: $CC and intel icc/ecc compiler, Bob Friesenhahn, 2003/04/09
- Re: $CC and intel icc/ecc compiler, Samuel Meder, 2003/04/09
- Re: $CC and intel icc/ecc compiler, Bob Friesenhahn, 2003/04/09
- Re: $CC and intel icc/ecc compiler, Charles Wilson, 2003/04/09
- Re: $CC and intel icc/ecc compiler, Robert Boehne, 2003/04/09
- Re: $CC and intel icc/ecc compiler,
Allan Sandfeld Jensen <=
- Re: $CC and intel icc/ecc compiler, Samuel Meder, 2003/04/20
- Re: $CC and intel icc/ecc compiler, Allan Sandfeld Jensen, 2003/04/10