This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: SETPGRP and autoconf
On Thu, Jul 26, 2001 at 12:40:02PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 16:24:20 -0700
> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <dmj+@andrew.cmu.edu>
>
> I should have objected :) But it'd been so long since I last saw this issue
> that I forgot about it.
>
> AC_FUNC_SETPGRP has some regrettable problems. Witness:
>
> checking whether setpgrp takes no argument... configure: error: cannot check
> setpgrp if cross compiling
>
> Thus breaking all host-x-host cross builds.
>
> Bugger!
Got my reaction in one.
> This is what I really hate about autoconf. There's no good reason for
> AC_FUNC_SETPGRP to be an executed test. If you have a prototype for
> setpgrp(void), setpgrp(1,1) won't compile, and you don't need to execute
> anything at all.
>
> Who says you've got a prototype? Even though GDB requires an ISO C
> compiler now, this doesn't mean the host's headers have to be ISO
> C-compliant.
Ugh.
> What can we do about this? Besides my usual hack: I have a huge list of
> autoconf cache variables in my build environment, preset.
>
> Dunno. I don't think there are too many people cross-compiling GDB.
> If we want to fix this, we could use an alternative check for
> AC_FUNC_SETPGRP when cross-compiling based on the setpgrp prototype.
> I don't think it would hurts not defining SETPGRP_VOID if no
> prototypes are available, since passing the extra arguments should be
> harmless.
Even if we don't require ISO C headers when building, requiring them
while cross-compiling doesn't seem too unreasonable. I'll try to work
up a patch for this.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer