------- Comment #30 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2010-09-04 16:41 ------- > > It's clear that the way to go is to first write > > small patch to smooth out the nuances you pointed out, and then > > introduce the new macro in a way that doesn't change the semantics. > > Since the differences are generally deliberate, what's actually wanted is > a macro that preserves them.
Sure, I meant "leaving the differences in semantics to the single configure scripts". This is what H.J.'s patch does more or less, and I like it. I'm not sure whether the patches remove the need for the other patch in comment #21 though. Jack, can you post what you are exactly testing (without the regenerated files, which are unnecessary)? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45524
