Re: Warn on naked cross-tool names, add macros to detect target tools

[Eric Sunshine]

On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 06:23:22 -0500, Bonzini wrote:
> For target tools, it makes no sense to me to have naked names, so I am
> already looking for prefixed names only.  Ok to apply?
> * lib/autoconf/programs.m4 (AC_PATH_TOOL, AC_CHECK_TOOL,
> AC_CHECK_TOOLS): Warn if a cross-tool is found without
> a prefix.
> (AC_PATH_TARGET_TOOL, AC_CHECK_TARGET_TOOL,
> AC_CHECK_TARGET_TOOLS): New macros.
> * doc/autoconf.texi (Generic Programs): Document
> (AC_PATH_TARGET_TOOL, AC_CHECK_TARGET_TOOL,
> AC_CHECK_TARGET_TOOLS, and warn for future changes
> in the behavior of AC_PATH_TOOL, AC_CHECK_TOOL and
> AC_CHECK_TOOLS.

For API consistency, wouldn't it also make sense to introduce macros  
AC_CHECK_HOST_TOOL, AC_CHECK_HOST_TOOLS, and AC_PATH_HOST_TOOLS; and to  
deprecate AC_CHECK_TOOL, AC_CHECK_TOOLS, and AC_PATH_TOOL?

> address@hidden AC_CHECK_TARGET_TOOL (@var{variable}, @var{prog-to-check-for},
> +sets @code{RANLIB} to @file{i386-gnu-ranlib} if that program exists in
> address@hidden, or otherwise to @samp{ranlib} if that program exists in
> address@hidden, or to @samp{:} if neither program exists.

It seems like this description should be worded just like the description  
for AC_CHECK_TARGET_TOOLS, where you say "If none of the tools can be found  
with a prefix, and if the build and target types are equal, then the first  
one without a prefix is used."

-- ES