[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [PATCH v2 2/9] configure: cross-compiling without cross_prefix

From: Thomas Huth
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/9] configure: cross-compiling without cross_prefix
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 07:15:32 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.6.0

On 20/10/2020 00.24, Joelle van Dyne wrote:
> Correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't the following test still fail
> with --cross-prefix=""
> if test -n "$cross_prefix"; then
> ...
> That was my main reason for making this change.

That's why I wrote "still introduce the cross_compile=yes variable" ... that
change is certainly required anyway.

>>>>> @@ -456,6 +457,11 @@ for opt do
>>>>>    optarg=$(expr "x$opt" : 'x[^=]*=\(.*\)')
>>>>>    case "$opt" in
>>>>>    --cross-prefix=*) cross_prefix="$optarg"
>>>>> +                    cross_compile="yes"
>>>>> +  ;;
>>>>> +  --enable-cross-compile) cross_compile="yes"
>>>>> +  ;;
>>>>> +  --disable-cross-compile) cross_compile="no"
>>>> Can't you simply use --cros-prefix="" instead?
>>> I mean, still introduce the "cross_compile=yes" variable, just omit the new
>>> options.
>> That seems less intuitive for people trying to find this option. If --help
>> lists --enable-cross-compile I can guess what that means but there's no
>> way I could guess --cros-prefix="" unless I've been told or searched and
>> stumbled upon it. So unless it's a big problem I like the explicit options
>> better. Or is that a convention in other projects to use empty prefix to
>> enable cross compile that I don't know about?

I don't think that --cross-prefix is a "standard" option... Most other
(GNU-tools related) projects use "--build" and "--host" instead... so I
guess we're free to chose here. Let's see whether other people here have an
opionion on this...


reply via email to

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