[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: LD not precious?

From: Ralf Wildenhues
Subject: Re: LD not precious?
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 21:49:59 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-10-28)

* Philip A. Prindeville wrote on Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 09:35:59PM CET:
> On 01/14/2010 12:10 PM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > * Philip A. Prindeville wrote on Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 02:43:49AM CET:
> >>
> >> Is that an oversight? I ask because in a cross-compilation
> >> environment, getting CC and LD right are equally important.
> > 
> > Sure, but why would $LD be more important in cross compilation setups
> > than in native ones?  The cross-compiler usually calls the right linker.

> Because I'm encountering Makefiles that call $(LD) directly, and
> default LD to "ld" unless you explicitly override it (and not setting
> it to $(CC)).

Then that is a simple portability issue you should take up with the
authors of those Makefiles' input files.  They should add something like
  AC_CHECK_TOOL([LD], [ld])

to their, just like it is necessary to use AC_PROG_CC in
order to use $CC.


reply via email to

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