This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Building with --enable-languages problematic
- To: Fergus Henderson <fjh at cs dot mu dot oz dot au>
- Subject: Re: Building with --enable-languages problematic
- From: Phil Edwards <pedwards at disaster dot jaj dot com>
- Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2001 17:24:10 -0400
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- References: <1002646791.5644.5.camel@sonja> <20011009153007.A1495@nevyn.them.org> <1002650809.19331.4.camel@sonja> <20011009162834.A23280@disaster.jaj.com> <20011011162720.A4877@hg.cs.mu.oz.au>
On Thu, Oct 11, 2001 at 04:27:20PM +1000, Fergus Henderson wrote:
> On 09-Oct-2001, Phil Edwards <pedwards@disaster.jaj.com> wrote:
> > Something like the completely untested patch, appended?
[...]
> > + case "${enable_languages}" in
> > + # embedded tab -- do not untabify
> > + "*[ ]*") echo configure.in: --enable-languages arguments are not whitespace-separated 1>&2
> > + exit 1
> > + ;;
> > + *)
> > + ;;
> > + esac
>
> I've been bitten by that one before (using whitespace separators rather
> than comma separators for --enable-languages), so I'm in favour of
> this patch.
Except that it doesn't work, and I don't know why. Passing something like
--enable-languages="foo bar" always matches the global "*)" case, not the
"* *") case. (I removed the tab and brackets, and made other silly changes,
all to no avail.)
I thought after almost a decade of coding and syadmining that I knew my
way around Bourne scripting, but now I'm reconsidering. Any thoughts as
to what I'm missing?
Phil
--
If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater
than the animating contest for freedom, go home and leave us in peace. We seek
not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you;
and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen. - Samuel Adams