On 01/16/2013 07:24 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 01/16/2013 10:48 AM, Paul Eggert wrote:
>> On 01/16/13 04:46, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>>> Makes sense. Should I try to implement something along these lines (might
>>> take a few days), or are you planning to do that yourself (in which case
>>> I'll
On 01/16/2013 10:48 AM, Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 01/16/13 04:46, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>> Makes sense. Should I try to implement something along these lines (might
>> take a few days), or are you planning to do that yourself (in which case
>> I'll avoid the duplicated efforts)?
>
> I wasn't pla
On 01/16/13 04:46, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> Makes sense. Should I try to implement something along these lines (might
> take a few days), or are you planning to do that yourself (in which case
> I'll avoid the duplicated efforts)?
I wasn't planning on doing that, so please go ahead.
On 01/15/2013 04:16 AM, Paul Eggert wrote:
> 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 be
