This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[patch] Important comment update to gcc/configure.in
- From: Nathanael Nerode <neroden at twcny dot rr dot com>
- To: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, aoliva at redhat dot com
- Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 00:09:36 -0500
- Subject: [patch] Important comment update to gcc/configure.in
I believe this is correct. I want review only in case I got it wrong.
This clarifies the important issue of *which* assembler and linker
we are looking for -- it's not the BUILD->BUILD, BUILD->HOST, or
BUILD->TARGET assemblers (all of which might be used and different in
a Canadian cross compile)... it's the HOST->TARGET one, which we can't
always even execute.
Now that I've got this clear, I believe I'll actually be able to clean
up the related code.
* configure.in: Clarify comments.
* configure: Regenerate.
Index: configure.in
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/gcc/configure.in,v
retrieving revision 1.652
diff -u -r1.652 configure.in
--- configure.in 12 Mar 2003 20:56:04 -0000 1.652
+++ configure.in 14 Mar 2003 05:05:26 -0000
@@ -1441,6 +1441,9 @@
fi
# Figure out what assembler we will be using.
+# Identify the assembler which will work hand-in-glove with the newly
+# built GCC, so that we can examine its features. This is the assembler
+# which will be driven by the driver program.
AC_MSG_CHECKING(what assembler to use)
in_tree_gas=no
gcc_cv_as=
@@ -1529,7 +1532,9 @@
;;
esac
-# Figure out what linker we will be using.
+# Identify the linker which will work hand-in-glove with the newly
+# built GCC, so that we can examine its features. This is the linker
+# which will be driven by the driver program.
AC_MSG_CHECKING(what linker to use)
in_tree_ld=no
gcc_cv_ld=