This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the binutils project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: binutils prerequisites (recent zlib version - what else?)

kevin diggs <> writes:

> On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 11:26 AM, Ian Lance Taylor <> wrote:
>> Unrecognized --with options are ignored. ÂThe difference in the
>> Ian
> 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


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]