On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 2:34 AM, Thierry Reding <[email protected]> wrote: > 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
Okay, looks like you've done your part. I just pushed this patch. Thanks! _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
