Harlan Stenn wrote:
> > > I think you are missing my point.
> > > The information I am talking about is used for *runtime* decisions - very
> > > likely in a script that is in a shared directory used by many different
> > > architectures.
If for use at runtime then config.guess is very poorly suit
Harlan Stenn wrote:
> > Well, you can create and maintain a 'config.linuxdistro' on your own...
>
> Yes, and then code:
>
> ...
> cvo=`config.guess`
> case $cvo in
> *-*-linux-gnu)
> cvo=`config.linuxdistro`
> ;;
> esac
> ...
Yes. This is how it's meant.
> everywhere one would othe
> This is too simple. It increases the temptation to use the distro's name,
> instead of writing an autoconf test. I've already explained that this is
> undesirable because it limits the freedom to fork a new distribution.
You keep insisting that the output only be used for autoconf.
I am talking
>>> "Ralf" == Ralf Corsepius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ralf> Hi,
Ralf> After having upgraded from automake-1.8.1 to automake-1.8.2 (And having
Ralf> modified some Makefile.ams), I received this warning from automake:
Ralf> configure.ac:16: version mismatch. This is Automake 1.8.2,
Ralf> c
On Wed, Jan 14, 2004 at 06:28:55PM +0100, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
> >>> "Patrick" == Patrick Welche <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Patrick> Slowly giving up.. autoconf cvs with Eric Sunshine's
> Patrick> SHELL patch applied, but maybe not propagated to all
> Patrick> the executables involv
>>> "Tom" == Tom Tromey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
Tom> Well, really it might be nice to clean up target library
Tom> support, but I wouldn't recommend it unless you have a
Tom> real need; it is pretty messy.
A simple way to support BUILD- and TARGET- compilations (and
more) could be t
>>> "Patrick" == Patrick Welche <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Patrick> Slowly giving up.. autoconf cvs with Eric Sunshine's
Patrick> SHELL patch applied, but maybe not propagated to all
Patrick> the executables involved, and automake cvs of today,
Patrick> NetBSD-1.6ZG/i386, in the automake dire
> > It is way to late to even think about changing things now.
It's never too late to improve software.
The amount of software that will be created from here on can be reasonably
expected to be MUCH greater than what has been written so far.
The change to, for example:
i686-DistroRev-linux-gnu
Hello
I just want to know how far Fortran 90 is supported by
automake/autoconf. Afaik it isn't supported yet. Are there any plans
about this?
Cheers,
Mandy
> "Lars" == Lars Hecking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Lars> if BUILD_SRC_BEOS_SUBDIR
Lars> d_beos = beos
Lars> endif
Lars> SUBDIRS = $(d_beos)
Lars> If I run make distcheck in the top level directory, it bombs out at
Lars> one point because the beos subdir doesn't exist. Is this a bug in
Lar
Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> One handy use when building for multiple architectures is to use
> config.guess to supply part of the build directory name so that it is
> very easy to manage heterogeneous builds within one file system.
Agreed. That's a use of the distribution name and version that won't
Gary V.Vaughan wrote:
> It depends on the compiler you use. If you have configured with a
> crosscompiler, it will do that yes. Maybe you can override it? You
> would have to copy the compile and link rules from the generated
> Makefile into your Makefile.am, and then change the compiler to
> $
On Tuesday, January 13, 2004, at 06:05 pm, Warren Turkal wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 13 January 2004 05:54 am, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
Warren Turkal wrote:
| Is there any analysis on what it would take to create utility
programs
| that are only used during buil
13 matches
Mail list logo