[Top][All Lists]

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

[DotGNU]write a GCC->aCC wrapper! (was Re: hpux issues)

From: S11001001
Subject: [DotGNU]write a GCC->aCC wrapper! (was Re: hpux issues)
Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 12:42:23 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.0+) Gecko/20020525

James Mc Parlane wrote:
I have managed to get past this. This code looks like it is only used to
generate dynamic dependencies, so even though the make process squeals like
a pig,I managed to get treecc to compile only by modifying
treecc/ so that instead of


it reads

AC_PROG_CC(aCC gcc cc)
AC_PROG_CXX(aCC gcc cc)

Another, perhaps more elegant solution would be to write a wrapper around aCC that behaved like gcc.

Happy with this I moved onto building pnet, made the same change started
making and came a cropper with /pnet/support/
When compiling with gcc I get the following line in the Makefile

/bin/sh ../include/il_errno.h gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.
-I../include    -I../libgc/include -g -O2 -Wall > errno_map.c

which works..

When compiling with aCC I get the following line in the Makefile

/bin/sh ../include/il_errno.h aCC -Ae -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.
-I../include    -I../libgc/include -g >errno_map.c
aCC: warning 901: unknown option: `-': use +help for online documentation.

I believe the gcc wrapper would solve this problem as well.

Which does not. At this point I went to bed.

So I'm just wondering. Is the pnet build going to be limited just to gcc?

Even if it is, does that really hurt, given this idea?

Stephen Compall
DotGNU `Contributor' --

I think that freedom is more important than mere technical advance. I
would always choose a less advanced free program rather than a more
advanced nonfree program, because I won't give up my freedom for
something like that. My rule is, if I can't share it with you, I won't
take it.
        -- RMS

reply via email to

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