On 23 Jun 2010, at 13:56, Peter Rosin wrote: > Hi Gary, Hi Peter,
> Den 2010-06-22 14:53 skrev Gary V. Vaughan: >> In this case, Peter, would you point me at the followup patches that need >> this preliminary prep work? I had a poke around in your git branch but >> couldn't (quickly) figure out where this is going... and without that it's >> hard to do a sane review. > > I've said it elsewhere, It seems our posts crossed, but I saw the other response too, thanks. > but here are more details in case you missed it: > > In _LT_LINKER_SHLIBS([TAGNAME]) > > _LT_TAGVAR(compile_tag, $1)=-TC > > and in _LT_LANG_CXX_CONFIG([TAG]) > > _LT_TAGVAR(compile_tag, $1)=-TP > > As found in commit 9c848f1e8acdf435d019aa80f3f0b0aeb45613f7 > "Add MSVC support." Actually, this is kind of backwards for how I would have done things... normally I try to build the infrastructure in the earlier patches, and then slot in the enhancements that build on it later. But no matter really, as long as you're happy to point forward to subsequent patches that rely on seemingly non-functional additions from earlier patches as we work through the merge. If you'd rather follow Ralf's suggestions from earlier in this thread, and move the hinting process into Automake, then I'll be delighted. Otherwise, pending the outcome of that discussion, if you're still happy that your earlier branch was already going in the right direction, feel free to commit this to master. I haven't made any testsuite reruns for this part of the review, since this patch is so innocuous I'll wait until I'm reviewing something more contentious first... I am assuming, of course, that you have made a successful testsuite run with this patch merged to guard against syntax errors or the like (successful testsuite run on Linux or Mac is perfectly fine at this point). Cheers, -- Gary V. Vaughan (g...@gnu.org)
