On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 08:29:04PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote: > On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 11:07:03AM -0800, Matt Turner wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 7:50 AM, Thierry Reding > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Override the cross_compiling and ac_tool_prefix variables by reassigning > > > to them instead of redefining the macros. Redefining them will actually > > > cause the variable names to be replaced instead of their content. > > > > > > Furthermore push the definition of CPPFLAGS before running the checks > > > for the build tools to avoid the host CPPFLAGS from leaking into the > > > build CPPFLAGS. > > > > > > While at it drop the redefinition of AC_TRY_COMPILER which hasn't been > > > used since autoconf 2.50 and make sure that all definitions are properly > > > popped when done (LDFLAGS, ac_cv_prog_CPP, ac_cv_prog_CXXCPP). > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <[email protected]> > > > --- > > > m4/ax_prog_cc_for_build.m4 | 37 +++++++++++-------------------------- > > > m4/ax_prog_cxx_for_build.m4 | 38 ++++++++++++-------------------------- > > > 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-) > [...] > > Are these changes from upstream? I really have concerns about making > > non-trivial changes to these files. > > No, they're not. I do plan to send these changes upstream, but quite > honestly I'm not sure that they'll be accepted given that I have none of > the copyright assigment forms filled with the FSF. Looking at the > autoconf-archive website doesn't actually say anything about copyright > assignment, but as the project is hosted on GNU I'm a bit sceptical. > Also note that AX_PROG_CXX_FOR_BUILD doesn't actually exist upstream. I > essentially copied it from AX_PROG_CC_FOR_BUILD. > > I'm actually a bit confused as to why the original cross-compilation > patches that I sent in worked at all (and I'm sure they did because I > tested them fairly extensively at the time), but looking at configure > as generated with the macros as they are in the repository right now, > things are severely broken. Running the configure script shows a bunch > of > > checking for 2... no > > messages, and cross-compiling doesn't actually succeed. With the above > patches I've verified that Mesa cross-builds from x86_64 to ARM. > > Still, if you have any doubts I can try feeding those changes upstream > and see what comes of it. If that happens we can easily sync the changes > back by copying the files.
For reference, I've submitted patches for both macros upstream. They are
available here:
http://savannah.gnu.org/patch/index.php?7890
http://savannah.gnu.org/patch/index.php?7891
Thierry
pgp7txOqoV1mI.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
