[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2012 12:17:43 +0200
From: Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] pcc support for configure
* Isaac Dunham <idunham@...abit.com> [2012-10-15 21:12:31 -0700]:
> +# Older PCC versions don't define __PIC__ with -fPIC
> +#
> +tryflag CFLAG_TEST "-x c"
> +printf '#ifndef __PIC__\n__PIC__=0\n#endif\n' | \
> +$CC -E $CFLAG_TEST -fPIC - | grep __PIC__ && \
> +CFLAGS_SHARED_ALL="$CFLAGS_SHARED_ALL -D__PIC__=1"
> +
i don't think it's worth adding such checks
pcc is still in development and the last
release was very much broken
when it gets more stable and widely used then
such ckecks will make sense, right now we can
just depend on the latest pcc
even with clang we can easily say that we
only support clang+llvm >= 3.1
(i assume the -ffreestanding bug is fixed in that)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
