Re: Cleaning up AC_PROG_CC_C_O semantics

2013-01-14 Thread Paul Eggert
On 01/14/2013 11:56 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > 1. It checks that *both* 'cc' and '$CC' (which might easily be 'gcc' > or 'clang') supports "-c -o" together. Why? If the user has a > broken base vendor compiler, but has installed a better one (say > GCC), why should he still b

Re: [PATCH 01/11] compile: avoid AC_PROG_CC messy rewrite

2013-01-14 Thread Stefano Lattarini
On 01/14/2013 09:26 PM, Eric Blake wrote: > On 01/12/2013 05:51 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: >> Instead, only touch up AC_PROG_CC to distribute the 'compile' script and >> to rewrite $CC if a losing compiler is detected. > > That reads poorly - I first parsed it as "if losing compiler, then > (dis

[PATCH] {master} compat: restore AM_PROG_MKDIR, again

2013-01-14 Thread Stefano Lattarini
OK, this is getting ridiculous, but we cannot remove this macro yet (and, yes, the fault for this mess lies entirely on me; let's not dwell on that, thank you very much). Gettext (so far the greatest "offender" in the use of AM_PROG_MKDIR), in its latest release 0.18.2, has removed all the uses of

Re: [PATCH 01/11] compile: avoid AC_PROG_CC messy rewrite

2013-01-14 Thread Eric Blake
On 01/12/2013 05:51 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > Instead, only touch up AC_PROG_CC to distribute the 'compile' script and > to rewrite $CC if a losing compiler is detected. That reads poorly - I first parsed it as "if losing compiler, then (distribute the 'compile' script and rewrite $CC)"; when

Re: Cleaning up AC_PROG_CC_C_O semantics

2013-01-14 Thread Stefano Lattarini
Hi Paul. On 01/14/2013 08:45 PM, Paul Eggert wrote: > On 01/14/13 02:24, Stefano Lattarini wrote: >> Autoconfers, WDYT? > > I think I'm lost. http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=13378 > is a long thread. > Yeah, sorry for not giving a more clear summary. Here are the main grips I (and

Re: Cleaning up AC_PROG_CC_C_O semantics

2013-01-14 Thread Paul Eggert
On 01/14/13 02:24, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > Autoconfers, WDYT? I think I'm lost. http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=13378 is a long thread.

Cleaning up AC_PROG_CC_C_O semantics (was: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Automatically call AM_PROG_CC_C_O as required.)

2013-01-14 Thread Stefano Lattarini
[+cc bug-autoconf] Reference: On 01/13/2013 10:06 PM, Nick Bowler wrote: > On 2013-01-13, Stefano Lattarini wrote: >> On 01/13/2013 09:01 PM, Nick Bowler wrote: >>> +dnl Automatically invoke AM_PROG_CC_C_O as necessary. Since AC_PROG_CC i

Re: bug#13378: [PATCH 2/2] Automatically call AM_PROG_CC_C_O as required.

2013-01-14 Thread Stefano Lattarini
On 01/13/2013 10:06 PM, Nick Bowler wrote: > On 2013-01-13, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > >> Another useful follow-up would be to move the AM_PROG_CC_C_O in a private >> macro (to be expanded in AC_CONFIG_COMMANDS_PRE like you did above), and >> make AM_PROG_CC_C_O a no-op (without runtime deprecatio