[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Multiple --with-foo possible?

From: Thomas Schwinge
Subject: Re: Multiple --with-foo possible?
Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2008 14:06:50 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.11


On Sat, Apr 05, 2008 at 12:54:39PM +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Thomas Schwinge wrote on Sat, Apr 05, 2008 at 11:36:50AM CEST:
> > Is it possible to have the case handled where multiple ``--with-foo''
> > arguments are given?  Currently the last one wins, it seems.
> > 
> > What I'd like to support is ``--with-module=this
> > --with-module=another_one ...''.  Is this possible?
> No, unfortunately not; the possibility to override earlier command line
> arguments is pretty helpful in some cases.  You can use
>   --with-module=foo,bar,baz

That would be an option, but I also need to pass additional information
per module, à la ``--with-module=FILE,PRIORITY,SHARE,COMMAND LINE''.

> or
>   --with-foo-module --with-bar-module...

The ``foo'', ``bar'' parts aren't preassigned, everything is possible.
Also the number of modules isn't limited (in theory).

> If those modules describe parts of your package, then you should be
> using --enable/--disable instead, no?

They don't: they're external files to be embedded into a library.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]