bug-autoconf
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

[sr #111108] Opinionated "checking for" message of AC_PROG_CC


From: jxl
Subject: [sr #111108] Opinionated "checking for" message of AC_PROG_CC
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2024 06:04:57 -0400 (EDT)

URL:
  <https://savannah.gnu.org/support/?111108>

                 Summary: Opinionated "checking for" message of AC_PROG_CC
                   Group: Autoconf
               Submitter: jxl
               Submitted: Mon 19 Aug 2024 10:04:55 AM UTC
                Category: None
                Priority: 5 - Unprioritized
                Severity: 1 - Wish
                  Status: None
                 Privacy: Public
             Assigned to: None
        Originator Email: 
             Open/Closed: Open
         Discussion Lock: Any
        Operating System: GNU/Linux


    _______________________________________________________

Follow-up Comments:


-------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon 19 Aug 2024 10:04:55 AM UTC By: jxl <jxl>
Hello, autoconf dudes!

I would like to preface this by saying I couldn't find the specific location
where this is happening, and maybe the below is automake's doing when
redefining the AC_PROG_CC macro, but I couldn't verify that either, so I'm
defaulting to autoconf. Please redirect me to the right place if I've made a
mistake.

In a project I work on, I recently had a change to a call to AC_PROG_CC, and
one of the developers noticed that the macro emits a "checking for" message
that goes checking for gcc, appended with the found compiler. In the case
where CC is set to, for example, clang, the message becomes "checking for
gcc... clang", which raised a few brows.

Would it be possible to to change the "gcc" bit to say "C compiler" going
forward instead, as that's what the semantic of the macro actually is? I know
it's a tiny nit, but one I can see the uninitiated (and even the initiated,
apparently) trip over.

Thank you.

Again, if this is the wrong place where I should be asking for this change,
point me to where I should be reporting this instead.







    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <https://savannah.gnu.org/support/?111108>

_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


reply via email to

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