On 23 March 2010 10:15, Steffen Dettmer <steffen.dett...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> This illustrates a weirdness of autotools: poor support for >> installing interpreted languages, and also conversely for >> build-time compiled programs. > > Yes, also for coffee-cooking there is poor support only. :-)
Sure, but autotools is for building programs, not for making coffee. > I don't think build-time compiled C programs shall be suppored > while cross compiling. I think it already is complex enough. > Otherwise you had to do all checks twice and end up in many > variables with confusing names, and those who are not > cross-compiling probably accidently will mix them. On the contrary, this is a very useful feature (why should one not be able to build host programs when cross-compiling?) for which support in autoconf would simplify developers' life (even the ad-hoc support in binutils that I mentioned is pretty easy to use). >> > I though of perl, but (A), i don't like slow tools, > > (I think Perl is fast) Me too, the above assertion was not written by me! You missed the author line at the top from the original author of these double-quoted comments. -- http://rrt.sc3d.org