On Fri, 12 Aug 2011, Sven Verdoolaege wrote: > On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 07:28:52PM +0000, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > > On Fri, 12 Aug 2011, Sven Verdoolaege wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 07:16:55PM +0000, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > > > > Do you mean there is not only a requirement to build both libraries, > > > > but > > > > there is a requirement to build CLooG *first*, then ISL, so that ISL's > > > > libisl.a overwrites CLooG's rather than the other way round (supposing > > > > that they are installed in the same prefix)? > > > > > > No. You build isl first and configure CLooG to use that isl. > > > > Will CLooG give an error if you configure it in such a way that its isl > > would overwrite one previously installed? If not, this seems too > > error-prone - there's no obvious way for CLooG to know whether a > > previously installed isl comes from a previous installation of CLooG > > (should be overwritten) or was installed on its own (so CLooG should be > > built to use it). > > If CLooG is told to use a previously built isl, it won't even compile > the bundled isl.
I advise either removing the option for CLooG to use bundled ISL, or making the bundled version the recommended version for GCC. Having too many ways to configure things is bad. -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com
