Re: Compute flags for target in configure, not Makefile

[Chris Faylor <cgf at cygnus dot com>]

Alexandre wrote:
>On Jul 29, 2000, Chris Faylor <cgf@cygnus.com> wrote:
>> I also see that you're using gcc specific options if the gcc source
>> directory exists, which, IMO, is not a very good method for determining
>> when it is ok to use gcc options.
>
>If gcc isn't being built, those options won't make any difference, and
>it is impossible to tell at configure time whether someone is going to
>remove the gcc build sub-tree after configure, so I'm inclined to keep
>them instead of performing the test in the Makefile, as we used to do.
>Do you see any reason to do otherwise?

I see why you are doing what you're doing and I'm quite happy to move
all of the cruft out of the Makefile and into configure.in where it
belongs.  But I think that you've changed the way that configure/make
work very subtly.  Maybe it won't hurt anyone.  I dunno.

If someone removes the gcc build directory, isn't it possible that
-nostdinc++ won't work with the installed compiler?  You seem to add
that if the gcc directory exists and c++ is enabled.

Won't this potentially cause problems if you do something like 'make
all-something' and 'something' uses c++?  I know that there aren't many
somethings (cygwin doesn't count here, since it already depends on gcc)
that have any c++ components right now, but it sounds like you've added
a potential inadvertent dependency, nonetheless.

Again, maybe this isn't an issue and maybe it's worth just doing this
ways in the interests of simplicity.  You've probably already considered
all of this.

>I'm working on that.  I'll post a patch in a couple of minutes, but
>since it may take a long while for me to set up a working cygwin
>cross-build environment to be able to test the patch for a Canadian
>cross, if there's anybody with a working cygwin environment on-line
>willing to test the patch, let me know, and I'll post the patch.
>Meanwhile, I'll proceed with my own builds to test it.

I'll be willing to test this this weekend.  I've got a cygwin
cross-compilation environment just waiting for a patch.  :-)

cgf