[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: using autoconf with ppuxlc++,spuxlc++

From: Ralf Wildenhues
Subject: Re: using autoconf with ppuxlc++,spuxlc++
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 19:13:13 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2010-08-04)

* John Wohlbier wrote on Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 06:08:47PM CEST:
> On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 12:24 AM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > How exactly do you invoke configure, what does configure output as
> > dependency mechanism for these two compilers, where are the manpages
> > for the compilers?

> 1) I'm not exactly sure what you're asking about invoking configure. We have
> 3 configure.acs, and the first one uses AC_CONFIG_SUBDIRS to run the
> configures for the PPE and SPE. Those configures are done as cross compiles
> using configure.gnu. I can give you more detail about this if it's needed.
> 3) I've attached the output of ppuxlc++ >& manpage. Let me know if you need
> anything else from this.
> 2) I think you've found the thread to pull on. I see this:
> checking dependency style of ppuxlc... (cached) gcc3
> The fact that it's cached makes me nervous, b/c if I scan up the output I
> find the dependency style listed a couple times.
> checking dependency style of gcc... gcc3
> checking dependency style of g++... gcc3

If I'm guessing correctly then the last lines happen during toplevel
configure, and the ppuxlc checking one in a sub configure?  If yes, then
you need to ensure to unset the respective cache variable before the
later checks (am_cv_{CC,CXX}_dependencies_compiler_type).  If no, you
need to ensure $CC/$CXX are set to the right compilers before

> It seems like it's possible that the "boiler plate" kind of checks
> (including dependency style) are being made with gcc/g++ before I'm able to
> change to the cross compiler and it's using the previously cached value.

Yep, that's one of the possibilities.

> Either that, or depcomp really does think ppuxlc++ has gcc3 dependency
> style.


> Here's a few lines from my where CCS_WITH_PPU_COMPILER,
> CCS_TUNE_PCC, CCS_TUNE_PCXX are macros that set CC and CXX to be ppuxlc and
> ppuxlc++ respectively (I didn't originally write those macros, but I think
> they were written since AC_PROG_CC and AC_PROG_CXX don't support these
> compilers). With this ordering, should those "boiler plate" checks be
> performed with the ppuxlc(++)? Is there a way I can specifically call
> "checking dependency style"?

No.  Can you share the CCS_* macros though (including other non-public
macros they require or invoke)?  From what you posted I cannot tell what
is happening.



reply via email to

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