Re: Not-really-cross-compilation issues

2001-01-22 Thread Akim Demaille
"Peter" == Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Peter Autoconf now assumes that if you can't run a program then you Peter must be cross-compiling, so you should use --host. No, it says `It doesn't work', and `if you were doing cross compilation, then say it loud and clear'. What kind

Re: Not-really-cross-compilation issues

2001-01-22 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Akim Demaille writes: Peter Autoconf now assumes that if you can't run a program then you Peter must be cross-compiling, so you should use --host. No, it says `It doesn't work', and `if you were doing cross compilation, then say it loud and clear'. What kind of message would you suggest?

Re: Not-really-cross-compilation issues

2001-01-22 Thread Alexandre Oliva
On Jan 22, 2001, Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No message, just continue. Or maybe some message, but continue anyway. At the expense of having all execution tests fail for the wrong reason? -- Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/ Red Hat GCC

Re: Not-really-cross-compilation issues

2001-01-22 Thread Akim Demaille
"Peter" == Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Peter Akim Demaille writes: Autoconf now assumes that if you can't Peter run a program then you must be cross-compiling, so you should Peter use --host. No, it says `It doesn't work', and `if you were doing cross compilation, then say it

Re: Not-really-cross-compilation issues

2001-01-22 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Alexandre Oliva writes: On Jan 22, 2001, Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No message, just continue. Or maybe some message, but continue anyway. At the expense of having all execution tests fail for the wrong reason? The execution tests are going to fail anyway, whether you

Re: Not-really-cross-compilation issues

2001-01-22 Thread Alexandre Oliva
On Jan 22, 2001, Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Alexandre Oliva writes: On Jan 22, 2001, Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No message, just continue. Or maybe some message, but continue anyway. At the expense of having all execution tests fail for the wrong reason?

Re: Not-really-cross-compilation issues

2001-01-21 Thread akim
On Sat, Jan 20, 2001 at 12:22:58AM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote: I've created a simple shared library that I placed at a non-standard location for illustration purposes. Imagine I want to configure a package to link against that library: $ cat configure.in AC_INIT(.) AC_PROG_CC

Re: Not-really-cross-compilation issues

2001-01-21 Thread Peter Eisentraut
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: # With Autoconf 2.50-to-be: $ LIBS='-L/tmp/obscure -ltest' ./configure checking for gcc... gcc checking whether the C compiler works... configure: error: cannot run C compiled programs. To enable cross compilation, use `--host'. Could you try see what

Not-really-cross-compilation issues

2001-01-19 Thread Peter Eisentraut
I've created a simple shared library that I placed at a non-standard location for illustration purposes. Imagine I want to configure a package to link against that library: $ cat configure.in AC_INIT(.) AC_PROG_CC AC_OUTPUT # With Autoconf 2.13: $ LIBS='-L/tmp/obscure -ltest' ./configure