>Nicolas Williams <Nicolas.Williams at sun.com> wrote: > >> On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 03:24:13PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > >> > The problem with crosss compilations is that it does not really work if >> > the >> > software uses dynamic autoconfiguration for portability. >> >> That doesn't make cross-compilation useless. > >I don't like to say this, but it makes cross compilation harder than people >may >expect. Many people believe that cross compilation is easy because the GNU >autoconf documentation incorrectly claims this is something that works by >default. In fact, GNU autoconf provides some basic fallback definitions that >apply for Linux and that may allow to compile a piece of software on a >different >Linux platform. If you like or need to go beyond this, you start hand crafting >the "autoconf results".
For Solaris we generally do not use auto configuration; this includes even things like perl. Certainly the bits which are used initial bringup do not depend on auto configuration; that may change if ksh93 becomes more important but if cross-compiling for architecture ports becomes a requirement for ON, then something will have to give. But that's neither here nor this case. Casper
