>>>>> "Mo" == Mo DeJong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Mo> Well, what if we did this? It kind of puts the hack back in but it Mo> does it without keeping the AC_CYGWIN macros and without compiling Mo> anything. The problem is that you require AC_CANONICAL_HOST, hence you require config.guess and config.sub. This is what we are trying to avoid.
- AC_CYGWIN etc. (Was: AC_OBJEXT again) Akim Demaille
- Re: AC_CYGWIN etc. (Was: AC_OBJEXT again) Earnie Boyd
- Re: AC_CYGWIN etc. (Was: AC_OBJEXT again) Alexandre Oliva
- Re: AC_CYGWIN etc. (Was: AC_OBJEXT again) Mo DeJong
- Re: AC_CYGWIN etc. (Was: AC_OBJEXT again) Alexandre Oliva
- Re: AC_CYGWIN etc. (Was: AC_OBJEXT again) Akim Demaille
- Re: AC_CYGWIN etc. (Was: AC_OBJEXT again) Mo DeJong
- Re: AC_CYGWIN etc. (Was: AC_OBJEXT again) Akim Demaille
- Re: AC_CYGWIN etc. (Was: AC_OBJEXT again) Akim Demaille
- Re: AC_CYGWIN etc. (Was: AC_OBJEXT again) Mo DeJong
- Re: AC_CYGWIN etc. (Was: AC_OBJEXT again) Akim Demaille
- Re: AC_CYGWIN etc. (Was: AC_OBJEXT again) Mo DeJong
- Re: AC_CYGWIN etc. (Was: AC_OBJEXT again) Akim Demaille
- Re: AC_CYGWIN etc. (Was: AC_OBJEXT again) Mo DeJong
- RE: AC_CYGWIN etc. (Was: AC_OBJEXT again) Bernard Dautrevaux
- Re: AC_CYGWIN etc. (Was: AC_OBJEXT again) Akim Demaille
- RE: AC_CYGWIN etc. (Was: AC_OBJEXT again) Earnie Boyd
- Re: AC_CYGWIN etc. (Was: AC_OBJEXT again) Alexandre Oliva
- Re: AC_CYGWIN etc. (Was: AC_OBJEXT again) Alexandre Oliva
- Re: AC_CYGWIN etc. (Was: AC_OBJEXT again) Lars J. Aas
- Re: AC_CYGWIN etc. (Was: AC_OBJEXT again) Alexandre Oliva
