Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2016 01:32:42 +0100 From: Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix wrapper auto detection in configure * Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> [2016-01-22 18:47:45 -0500]: > On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 10:56:03PM +0100, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > > the libc header based test is wrong if there are no such headers on the > > system only a free standing cc, which should be enough for a musl build. > > I'm trying to understand the usage case you're concerned about. Is it > failing to build the wrapper for a glibc-targeted toolchain that > doesn't actually have glibc installed? Is there a reason you woul want > the wrapper in this case? > distros package libc-headers separately and apparently one can install gcc without it and that should be enough to build musl. > > check for *-musl* in the target triplet instead. > > I don't think we depend on the target tuple at all now except as a way > of identifying the arch. It's only available with gcc, not other > compilers that lack -dumpmachine. I was actually thinking about this > issue a couple days ago and wonder if we should instead check for > predefined macros defined in the psABI for each arch to determine the > arch. This would also work on non-gcc compilers so you don't have to > manually pass the target arch (or tuple) to configure for them. > makes sense but note that only gcc and clang matter here (the wrapper will be disabled for other compilers) > Anyway if I can understand what real problem you're trying to solve > maybe I can come up with a better approach that doesn't expend > dependency on having a named target tuple. > > Rich
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.