[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: superfluous link rule for unknown languages
From: |
Tim Van Holder |
Subject: |
Re: superfluous link rule for unknown languages |
Date: |
Sun, 15 Jul 2001 10:39:30 +0200 |
> I don't understand the current code.
> With autoconf 2.50, how do we ever know to set $seen_exeext?
> We need to set this correctly for the code to work.
> But with 2.50 there is no way to set it.
>
> Akim, what is the fix?
I think the idea is to always add $(EXEEXT); whenever autoconf sets
up compilation for some language, EXEEXT is deduced. So if a PROGRAMS
variable is used in automake, EXEEXT will be available.
Except of course if, like in the bug report, it's a custom compilation;
then automake should probably indeed recognize 'foo:' as the custom rule
if bin_PROGRAMS contains 'foo'. I doubt very much that many packages
would rely on 'foo' being a rule in addition to foo$(EXEEXT) - after all,
if such a rule existed, it would cause substantially different behaviour
on systems with and without executable extensions.
- superfluous link rule for unknown languages, Alexandre Duret-Lutz, 2001/07/04
- Re: superfluous link rule for unknown languages, Tom Tromey, 2001/07/04
- Re: superfluous link rule for unknown languages, Alexandre Duret-Lutz, 2001/07/05
- Re: superfluous link rule for unknown languages, Tom Tromey, 2001/07/05
- Re: superfluous link rule for unknown languages, Alexandre Duret-Lutz, 2001/07/06
- Re: superfluous link rule for unknown languages, Tom Tromey, 2001/07/14
- Re: superfluous link rule for unknown languages,
Tim Van Holder <=
- Re: superfluous link rule for unknown languages, Tom Tromey, 2001/07/18
- Re: superfluous link rule for unknown languages, Tim Van Holder, 2001/07/19
- Re: superfluous link rule for unknown languages, Tom Tromey, 2001/07/21