Re: [avr-libc-dev] Are there any autoconf/automake experts around?

[Joerg Wunsch]

As Wojtek Kaniewski wrote:

> There is an undocumented macro AC_NO_EXECUTABLES which turns off the
> behavior you're talking about when placed before AC_PROG_CC.

Well, yes, that's what I eventually found out by digging through the
M4 files.

> Unfortunately it can and probably will disappear someday.

That will be the day we drop autoconf/automake completely.  If it
doesn't do what *we* want, there's no use in fighting against it.
I've burned an hour of precious time only to find out about that
undocumented stuff, and I've been really mad about these tools
already.

> The other approach is to add CFLAGS="-c" before and CFLAGS="" after
> AC_PROG_CC, to make autoconf think that it links an executable, when
> in fact it doesn't. But that's just an ugly hack.

...and it didn't work.  The CFLAGS settings appear to be completely
ignored in that test.  When looking at config.log, they're just
compiling their conftest.c file without any options whatsoever.  That
cannot work for our situation.  Btw., I'm quite angry that they are
even checking for what they deem to be a useful C compiler even if I
don't tell them to do so -- omitting the AC_PROG_CC statement didn't
help either (that's been my first attempt), obviously that test is
hardwired into the (mostly undocumented ``it does the right thing for
you'') AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE macro.

-- 
cheers, J"org               .-.-.   --... ...--   -.. .  DL8DTL

http://www.sax.de/~joerg/                        NIC: JW11-RIPE
Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)