[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: $CC and intel icc/ecc compiler
From: |
Robert Boehne |
Subject: |
Re: $CC and intel icc/ecc compiler |
Date: |
Wed, 09 Apr 2003 22:49:56 -0500 |
Samuel,
I should have seen this when the original patch was submitted, sorry
I didn't notice. The patch you've posted should work. I'm checking
it in, and if you still have trouble, let us know.
Thanks!
Robert
Samuel Meder wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2003-04-09 at 20:52, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> > It seems to me that both the before and after code is incorrect. The
> > reason why I say is is that $CC may contain the command plus some
> > arguments which are required for it to behave in some consistent way.
>
> So it is naive to think that those things should go into CFLAGS? Off the
> top of my head I can't think of a single scenario where I'd want them in
> $CC rather than $CFLAGS. Do you have one?
>
> > This means that the if $CC is 'foo -bar' then
> >
> > case $CC in
> > foo)
> >
> > will not match, but
> >
> > case $CC in
> > foo*)
> >
> > will. Parsing out just the first word from the specification would
> > solve the problem.
>
> I still maintain that you need `basename $CC` (basename does not strip
> arguments on the systems I tried). I don't really care to argue about
> the CC vs. CFLAGS issue (still curious about a example though) so I've
> attached a patch that adds *s.
>
> /Sam
>
> > You should not expect that the user won't add compiler options to the
> > base compiler name since this may be required to select a compiler
> > version, target architecture, or some other global option which is
> > best specified via the compiler specification.
> >
> > Bob
> >
> > On 9 Apr 2003, Samuel Meder wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, 2003-04-09 at 20:35, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 9 Apr 2003, Charles Wilson wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Only half paying attention, but doesn't this break an earlier patch
> > > > > that
> > > > > allowed things like "-mno-cygwin" to be included in the $CC variable?
> > > > > Or am I mis-remembering?
> > > >
> > > > Yes, it sounds like it does. It also would break important things
> > > > like
> > > >
> > > > CC="gcc -V 3.1.1"
> > > >
> > > > which I happen to be using at the moment.
> > >
> > > Please read the patch. It changes
> > >
> > > linux*)
> > > case $CC in
> > > icc|ecc)
> > > _LT_AC_TAGVAR(lt_prog_compiler_wl, $1)='-Wl,'
> > > _LT_AC_TAGVAR(lt_prog_compiler_pic, $1)='-KPIC'
> > > _LT_AC_TAGVAR(lt_prog_compiler_static, $1)='-static'
> > > ;;
> > > ccc)
> > > _LT_AC_TAGVAR(lt_prog_compiler_wl, $1)='-Wl,'
> > > # All Alpha code is PIC.
> > > _LT_AC_TAGVAR(lt_prog_compiler_static, $1)='-non_shared'
> > > ;;
> > > esac
> > > ;;
> > > to
> > >
> > > linux*)
> > > case `basename $CC` in
> > > icc|ecc)
> > > _LT_AC_TAGVAR(lt_prog_compiler_wl, $1)='-Wl,'
> > > _LT_AC_TAGVAR(lt_prog_compiler_pic, $1)='-KPIC'
> > > _LT_AC_TAGVAR(lt_prog_compiler_static, $1)='-static'
> > > ;;
> > > ccc)
> > > _LT_AC_TAGVAR(lt_prog_compiler_wl, $1)='-Wl,'
> > > # All Alpha code is PIC.
> > > _LT_AC_TAGVAR(lt_prog_compiler_static, $1)='-non_shared'
> > > ;;
> > > esac
> > > ;;
> > >
> > > If you are using gcc you will never hit this case statement. Also, a
> > > quick grep -r on mno-cygwin gives no hits other than ChangeLog.1 and
> > > mail/cygwin32. My understanding is that the option stripping that
> > > libtool does has changed a little so it may not longer need special
> > > processing. It should be orthogonal in any case.
> > >
> > > /Sam
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Bob
> > > > ======================================
> > > > Bob Friesenhahn
> > > > address@hidden
> > > > http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen
> > > >
> > >
> >
> > ======================================
> > Bob Friesenhahn
> > address@hidden
> > http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen
> >
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Name: ChangeLog.patch
> ChangeLog.patch Type: text/x-patch
> Encoding: 7bit
>
> Name: libtool.patch
> libtool.patch Type: text/x-patch
> Encoding: 7bit
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Libtool-patches mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool-patches
- $CC and intel icc/ecc compiler, Samuel Meder, 2003/04/09
- Re: $CC and intel icc/ecc compiler, Robert Boehne x238, 2003/04/09
- Re: $CC and intel icc/ecc compiler, Charles Wilson, 2003/04/09
- Re: $CC and intel icc/ecc compiler, Bob Friesenhahn, 2003/04/09
- Re: $CC and intel icc/ecc compiler, Samuel Meder, 2003/04/09
- Re: $CC and intel icc/ecc compiler, Bob Friesenhahn, 2003/04/09
- Re: $CC and intel icc/ecc compiler, Samuel Meder, 2003/04/09
- Re: $CC and intel icc/ecc compiler, Bob Friesenhahn, 2003/04/09
- Re: $CC and intel icc/ecc compiler, Charles Wilson, 2003/04/09
- Re: $CC and intel icc/ecc compiler,
Robert Boehne <=