RE: Make/bootstrap failure on i386-apple-darwin8.10.1 (Intel Core Duo)

["Dave Korn" <dave dot korn at artimi dot com>]

On 04 October 2007 00:58, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:

> Jack Howarth <howarth@bromo.msbb.uc.edu> writes:
> 
>>    Why should using a Canadian Cross suddenly break on
>> Mac OS X? We have been using --host when building gcc
>> packages in fink on Mac OS X for ages and it has never
>> been a problem. I would think this should become a PR
>> if gcc trunk has regressed on this issue.
>>             Jack
>> ps For example, see...
>> 
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2007-07/msg00847.html
> 
> The change in behaviour is due to changing the top level configure
> script from using autoconf 2.13 to autoconf 2.59.  With autoconf 2.59,
> if you want to build a normal package--one that will run on the
> machine on which you are doing the build--and you want to say which
> host to build it for, you must use --build, not --host.

  Could you just repeat that once more, slowly, for those of us who are a bit
hard-of-thinking?  I'm not quite clear about how, if you're building a normal
package, i.e. one that runs on the build machine, why you'd need to tell it
"which host to build it for" at all, since the answer, by definition, is "this
one".

  I always thought that if you want to build a "normal" package, i.e. one that
"will run on the machine on which you are doing the build" - what I've always
referred to as "a native build", you simply don't specify anything at all
(well, don't specify any of the --{build,host,target} trio, to be exact).

  But yeh, I get the part about how it now assumes that if you're specifying a
--host, you must be doing a cross-build, because if --host was the same as
--build, you wouldn't specify either ...


    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....