* Peter Rosin wrote on Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 11:38:43AM CEST: > Den 2010-08-12 19:55 skrev Ralf Wildenhues: > > Same with 'compile' by the way. If -O3 is spelt differently for cl, > > then I think translating that is a good idea.
> I think we should keep such translation to a bare minimum. The chance > of options clashing is just too high, and that will cause end user > confusion. *snip more good points* > Also, there aren't going to be perfect matches for most options anyway. > It's just a losing game. And to further add to the burden, the translation > is likely to be dependent on compiler version. All good points. Thanks. On the other hand, this means that better support for cl means adjusting a number of macros from Autoconf, Gnulib, and maybe Automake as well. For example, what about dependency tracking? Does the current code enable msvcmsys or msvisualcpp depmode if --enable-dependency-tracking is specified? Your "MSVC status" post on libtool-patches doesn't tell. > -g does not mean anything to cl, which is fortunate. Unfortunately it only > prints a warning on stderr, so the autoconf test thinks it's ok to use it > which means that you get that warning all over the place unless you help > the -g test or override CFLAGS manually. > > cl : Command line warning D9002 : ignoring unknown option '-g' > > There is autoconf code to look for output on stderr when testing if -g is > a viable option, but unfortunately cl always outputs a logo on stderr, > unless you feed it -nologo, so the autoconf test only works if you set > CC="cl -nologo". > > Given that the stderr code seems to have been added to autoconf in response > to a cl report, that code seems rather broken... Hmpf. Not sure what to do; for the moment an addition to install.texi to specify CC="cl -nologo" CFLAGS= would probably be prudent. Cheers, Ralf