[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Cross-compilation check broken

From: Robert Millan
Subject: Re: Cross-compilation check broken
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2009 22:42:33 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)

On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 11:19:29AM -0500, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> > But if it really meant to compare target with host, I think it should be:
> > 
> >   if test "x$target_cpu" != "x$host_cpu"; then
> > 
> > rather than what was before:
> > 
> >   if test "x$target" != "x$host"; then
> > 
> > Since "$target_os" has no real meaning.  Does that work for you?
> I understand that you are trying to exorcise "$target_os" by all means.
> By from the user standpoint, the second set of tools is needed if the
> "--target" option was specified and its argument is different from the
> one for the "--host" option.

Could you give an example situation in which this is needed?  Currently I
just see that user might do misleading things like:

  --host=powerpc-unknown-foo --target=powerpc-unknown-bar

and then the check will think that host != target because foo != bar, without
taking into account that "bar" is meaningless here.

Robert Millan

  The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
  how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
  still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."

reply via email to

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