This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: binutils prerequisites (recent zlib version - what else?)
kevin diggs <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 11:26 AM, Ian Lance Taylor <email@example.com> wrote:
>> Unrecognized --with options are ignored. ÂThe difference in the
> Why? Wouldn't it be better to tell the poor, confused user that they
> are configuring up the wrong tree? So that we can go RTFM and get the
> right option (or whine and complain if the desired functionality does
> not exist)?
It would be better in some cases, yes. However, the gcc and binutils
trees are examples where there is a master configure script at the top
which invokes a range of sub-configure scripts below. To make that
work, the master configure script needs to pass all --with and --enable
options to the sub-configure scripts. If configure scripts reject
unrecognized options, then it would be necessary for every configure
script to recognize every option. Since the sub-projects are maintained
by different groups of people, that is infeasible.
To avoid the problem there is, yes, an option: --enable-option-checking.
It's sort of pathetic to have an option for option checking, since most
people aren't going to be aware of it, but it's the best we have at the