[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
The following reply was made to PR misc/50166; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Antti Kantee <pooka%iki.fi@localhost>
To: Robert Millan <rmh%gnu.org@localhost>, gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost,
misc-bug-people%netbsd.org@localhost, gnats-admin%netbsd.org@localhost, netbsd-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost
Subject: Re: misc/50166
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2015 23:14:38 +0000
On 28/08/15 17:00, Robert Millan wrote:
> El 26/08/15 a les 14:05, Antti Kantee ha escrit:
>> The following reply was made to PR misc/50166; it has been noted by
>> From: Antti Kantee <pooka%iki.fi@localhost>
>> To: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost
>> Subject: Re: misc/50166
>> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 12:02:00 +0000
>> Adding AC_CANONICAL_HOST() to configure.ac makes configure fail because
>> a reference to install-sh is generated (and install-sh is not present).
> > ....
> > So, I tried it, and indeed there was fallout from AC_CANONICAL_HOST()
> (as noted in the PR). Can you try to work around it somehow?
> src/tools/make/configure.ac contains the official way to regenerate
> If you want to keep it simple, I could switch it to use uname instead of
> AC_CANONICAL_HOST(). It
> will break cross-compiling but AFAICS the whole purpose of this script
> is to bootstrap make on
> non-NetBSD systems, which is a very native-build oriented end, and I
> doubt cross-compiling was
> ever intended to work here anyways.
> Does that sound good?
I assume you mean cross-compiling in the Canadian sense, i.e. building
the tools for another system. I don't know if that works or is intended
to work. You can ask tech-toolchain%netbsd.org@localhost and observe the outcry
or lack thereof.
Testing for availability of MAXPATHLEN would be better, though. I guess
you can just look at some tool using MAXPATHLEN and determine what you
need to include so that you can test if it's available or not.
Main Index |
Thread Index |