On Mon, Feb 02, 2026 at 10:29:25PM +0000, Gavin Smith wrote: > On Mon, Feb 02, 2026 at 11:04:11PM +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 02, 2026 at 09:44:14PM +0000, Gavin Smith wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 02, 2026 at 10:18:28PM +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote: > > > > Maybe we should change the name of the conditional, then, for example to > > > > BUILD_C_LIBRARIES? > > > > > > XS modules are still a C library. > > > > Ok. So what about > > BUILD_SHARED_TXI_LIBRARIES > > Or maybe even better > > SHARED_TXI_LIBRARIES_BUILT > > The whole point of the BUILD_C_CODE condition was not to build C code > under tta/ if it was not necessary.
Ok. I also propose for that condition to be used to build some code that depends on the code build by BUILD_C_CODE. > There may be some reason that some other condition is also needed just > for the auxiliary, non-XS dynamic libraries (libtexinfo and so on) but > that was not the main point of the change. > > > To me it is clearer. Indeed, the HAVE_ICONV was used to mean that some > > code depends indirectly on the iconv library through the shared > > libraries. A conditional like SHARED_TXI_LIBRARIES_BUILT is clearer to > > me as it the texinfo shared libraries are a direct dependency of the > > code that may not use iconv directly. > > I agree that SHARED_TXI_LIBRARIES_BUILT (or whatever it's called) would > be better at expressing this dependency than HAVE_ICONV. But are you ok to use SHARED_TXI_LIBRARIES_BUILT instead of BUILD_C_CODE? -- Pat
