This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [autoconf-conversion] Re: Toplevel configury, multilibs, new autoconf versions

From: "Paolo Bonzini" <bonzini at gnu dot org>
To: "Phil Edwards" <phil at jaj dot com>,<gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>,<libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org>,<autoconf-conversion at codesourcery dot com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2003 00:02:29 +0200
Subject: Re: [autoconf-conversion] Re: Toplevel configury, multilibs, new autoconf versions
References: <20030726051610.GA1871@twcny.rr.com> <20030726205855.GA9281@disaster.jaj.com> <20030727233313.GA23583@disaster.jaj.com> <20030728195414.GA6633@disaster.jaj.com>

> *cackle*  I have sneakily removed the bit of shell code in configure which
> treats CXX as a "precious" variable.  Other precious variables are still
> passed around but CXX is correctly inherited from the environment like we
> want it to be.

Why not CC, AS and LD too?  I wonder if autoupdating newlib and other parts
of the unified tree will have similar issues.

Also, did you do this by modifying the configure script manually or by
overriding an Autoconf macro definition?

Paolo

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [autoconf-conversion] Re: Toplevel configury, multilibs, new autoconf versions
  - From: Phil Edwards

References:
- Re: Toplevel configury, multilibs, new autoconf versions
  - From: Nathanael Nerode
- Re: Toplevel configury, multilibs, new autoconf versions
  - From: Phil Edwards
- Re: Toplevel configury, multilibs, new autoconf versions
  - From: Phil Edwards
- Re: [autoconf-conversion] Re: Toplevel configury, multilibs, new autoconf versions
  - From: Phil Edwards

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]