Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote: >>>> "Tom" == Tom Tromey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > [...] > > Tom> Well, really it might be nice to clean up target library > Tom> support, but I wouldn't recommend it unless you have a > Tom> real need; it is pretty messy. > > A simple way to support BUILD- and TARGET- compilations (and > more) could be to support per-target (I'm speaking of Makefile > targets here) compiler flags. > > It can be a bit verbose, especially if the BUILD-tool mixes > several languages. Here is an example where tool1 would be > built for BUILD, and tool2 for HOST. > > noinst_PROGRAMS = tool1 tool2 > tool1_SOURCES = tool1a.c tool1b.cc > tool1_CC = $(CC_FOR_BUILD) > tool1_CXX = $(CXX_FOR_BUILD) > tool1_LD = $(CXXLD_FOR_BUILD) > tool2_SOURCES = tool2.c > > Just a thought.
This assumes that something sets those variables still (autoconf). Does it not make sense to have a build_PROGRAMS target supportted internally that just works for compiling these build targetted binaries? I am picturing the following. build_PROGRAMS = genkeysyms The build programs implies noinst, and the compile gets the proper options without manually overriding each var manually. wt -- Warren Turkal President, GOLUM, Inc. http://www.golum.org
