skip at pobox.com writes: > >> That failed because of a bug in configure.in: > >> > >> case $withval in > >> no) CC=cc > >> without_gcc=yes;; > >> yes) CC=gcc > >> without_gcc=no;; > >> *) CC=$withval > >> without_gcc=$withval;; > >> > >> It ignores the CC value on the command line. > > Martin> I don't think it is a bug. --without-gcc *overrides* the CC > Martin> environment variable, rather than ignoring it. > > I don't think that's right. There's no telling what the non-gcc compiler is > called. As far as I can tell you can't give any arguments to --without-gcc. That's right. The theory is that there's a vendor default compiler installed as "cc" on PATH, and there's GCC. configure tries to encourage use of GCC, but you can use the vendor compiler with --without-gcc, which is 100% equivalent to --with-gcc=no. But you *can* give arguments to --with-gcc. If you want to use a different compiler, use --with-gcc=a-different-compiler. If autoconf and configure.in are written correctly, GCC-dependent features will be bracketed with case "$without_gcc" in no ) gcc* ) # test for and configure GCC feature here ;; icc* ) # optional # test for and configure similar icc feature here ;; * ) # test for and configure similar portable feature here ;; Don't flame me if you agree with me that this is a poor interface. The option should be --with-compiler, of course.
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4