* Peter O'Gorman wrote on Fri, Mar 07, 2008 at 08:40:08AM CET: > Peter O'Gorman wrote: > > > > Ralf has already checked in a workaround for gcj being unable to create > > objects/executables. I guess I will add to that so it tests that an > > executable created by the compiler will actually run. > > Ok?
Yes, provided that you've tested it ... > + AT_CHECK([./foo1$(EXEEXT) || exit 77],[],[ignore],[ignore]) > + rm -f foo1.o foo1.obj foo1$(EXEEXT) ... after eliminating those syntax errors, $EXEEXT instead of $(EXEEXT). Cheers, Ralf _______________________________________________ Bug-libtool mailing list Bug-libtool@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-libtool
