httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marc Slemko <>
Subject Re: Configure and non-gcc platforms
Date Sat, 02 Aug 1997 23:46:52 GMT
On Sat, 2 Aug 1997, Jim Jagielski wrote:

> Marc Slemko wrote:
> > 
> > Configure likes setting -O2 far too much.  In fact, when I want to use a
> > different compiler that doesn't grok -O2 I have to work to do so.  Just
> > setting CC in Configure doesn't work.  Adding a blank "OPTIM=" line
> > doesn't work.  I actually need something on the OPTIM= line that is
> > non-blank so Configure won't default to -O2.  
> > 
> > Configure should know about what 
> Would you prefer Configure use a default of -O instead?
> Of course setting CC won't change it, because that just sets the compiler.

-O2 is a flag put in there for gcc.  It is not something that most
compilers understand.  If we aren't using gcc, we shouldn't add a default
of -O2.

> Setting OPTIM to "blank" reduces to a default, so of course that
> wouldn't work.

The problem is that it is bogus to have to put some fake placeholder in
there if you don't want any optimization flags.

My suggestion is that we only add -O2 if we are using gcc, and not add any
optimization flags otherwise.

> > 
> > Oh, I think it would be cool if helpers/TestLib output error messages to a
> > file and then either gave a prompt about where the file was from Configure
> > if it failed or automatically displayed it.  
> Why? I toyed with a '-s' flag to it; By default TestLib would
> display all error messages and adding -s to it would make it
> silent. I still have that code if it's voted as a +1

So that I can figure out what the heck is wrong.  Otherwise I have no way
to see how it is trying to compile the program to see that is is using
option x (eg. -O2) where it shouldn't be.

I don't particularily care how it is done, but just being told "it doesn't
work" without being told what doesn't work and without being able to try
it myself (since it removes the Makefile, etc. at exit) is not good.

> > 
> > We should also have a way to override the TestLib test that is documented
> > in the error message.  Eg. "touch .no-it-isn't-really-broken to override
> > the test".
> > 
> Huh?

If someone just wants to say "no, trust me" to bypass the TestLib bit then
they should be able to without hacking Configure.

View raw message